Battery Thermal Management Systems for EVs and Its Applications: A

Review

Haosong He

1 a

, Vishal Saini

2 b

and Xiangjie Chen

School of Mechanical, Electrical and Manufacturing Engineering, Loughborough University,

Epinal Way, Loughborough, U.K.

Department of Aeronautical and Automotive Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, U.K.

Keywords:

Battery Thermal Management System, Electric Vehicle, Review, Lithium-ion.

Abstract:

Electric vehicles (EVs) are a viable alternatives to achieve zero greenhouse gas emission goals. However,

the prime clean power source choice- Lithium-ion battery is sensitive to temperature, thus requires a battery

thermal management system (BTMS) to secure its performance and safety. Nowadays, most commercial

EVs implement liquid BTMS because the liquids are expected to have high heat transfer efﬁciency with both

cooling or heating capabilities. This paper ﬁrstly reviews the adverse effects of temperature on the battery

performance from three aspects: high temperature, low temperature and temperature difference. Then three

commercialised BTMSs: air cooling BTMS, liquid cooling BTMS, and refrigerants BTMS, are introduced,

and the main advantages and disadvantages for each BTMS strategy are discussed. Finally, this paper presents

main BTMS applications the BTMS applications for EVs on market.

1 INTRODUCTION

The UK’s industrial strategy states that the transi-

tion from fossil fuel cars to zero-emission vehicles

is crucial to maintain the UK’s international compet-

itiveness in the automotive industry (Slowik et al.,

2019). EVs are regarded as a promising approach

to replace the traditional internal combustion engine

vehicles to achieve zero-emission goal (Wu et al.,

2019). Since the commercialisation of Lithium-ion

batteries by Sony in 1991, Lithium-ion batteries are

extensively used in various ﬁelds. With the rapid de-

velopment of Lithium-ion battery technologies, these

batteries are also fast becoming the optimal choice

for EVs. This is due to their outstanding strengths,

such as high-power density, long cycle life, low self-

discharge rate and no memory effect (Reddy, 2011).

The critical obstacles to date for the market penetra-

tion of EVs lies in its energy storage system. Lithium-

ion batteries’ effective capacity is strongly associated

with its discharging rate, cycle number, and tempera-

ture. Extensive studies have proved that batteries dis-

charge capacity decays with the increasing tempera-

ture, discharging currents and cycling times. The dis-

charging rate and charging cycle are associated with

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9333-1068

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6774-7921

EVs’ real-time working conditions and the batteries

service time. Temperature, therefore, is the only el-

ement that can be actively controlled in driving and

becomes a vital subject to be investigated.

Temperature can signiﬁcantly affect battery life,

performance, safety aspects due to the inherent chem-

ical properties of Lithium-ion batteries. Batteries

can generate enormous heat during their cycling due

to the overpotential, and the resulting high tempera-

tures lead to degraded battery performance (Ma et al.,

2018). Furthermore, the low temperatures increase

the internal resistance of batteries due to the in-

creased viscosity of electrolyte that leads to the re-

duced charging and discharging capacity, resulting in

a compromised effective mileage of EVs (Wu et al.,

2019). Additionally, a low-temperature fast charge

can exacerbate Lithium dendrites formation, causing

irreversible loss of active battery materials and in-

creasing the potential of internal short circuits within

the battery. Thus, to prolong the cycle life and maxi-

mize the capability of power cells, automotive man-

ufacturers adopt battery thermal management sys-

tems(BTMSs) to actively control the operating tem-

perature range and minimize the temperature gradi-

ents inside the battery pack.

BTMS is a critical subsystem of the battery man-

agement system (BMS) aiming to maintain the sys-

He, H., Saini, V. and Chen, X.

Battery Thermal Management Systems for EVs and Its Applications: A Review.

DOI: 10.5220/0011030700003191

In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems (VEHITS 2022), pages 57-68

ISBN: 978-989-758-573-9; ISSN: 2184-495X

tem operating under an efﬁcient and safe temperature

range. In addition, it assists cells to operate under

the same conditions, making the cell ageing uniform.

This improves EVs’ safety, driving range, lifespan,

and cost. At EV’s level, delicate mechanical integra-

tion of BTMS and battery pack is crucial to reduce the

potential abuse probabilities such as over charge, over

discharge, over heat, over cooling and increase the ro-

bustness in extreme incidents, e.g., crash situations

or cabin intrusion (Scrosati et al., 2015). At battery

and cell levels, various safety factors need to be con-

sidered in battery design and usages, such as battery

pack/cell’s voltage and current limits, temperatures,

and temperature gradients (Motors et al., 2007). The

primary task for BTMS is to maintain the temperature

in an optimal region, detect any unexpected tempera-

ture changes, prevent temperatures runaway in cells

and further propagation among cells/modules. Other

auxiliary functions include minimising the impact of

the external ambient temperature on the battery pack,

minimising the temperature differences between and

within the individual cells, and necessary humidity

control.

Numerous approaches have been developed in the

past years for thermal management of EV batteries by

considering different factors. This paper presents a

systematic review of various BTMSs for EVs, includ-

ing the adverse effects of temperature on Lithium-ion

batteries. In addition, the approaches taken up by the

EV industry, with applications to current commercial

EVs are discussed.

2 BATTERY THERMAL

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

BTMS needs to consider the temperature inﬂuence on

battery pack level and the individual cell level.

Battery Pack Level. Non-uniform temperature

distribution within battery packs is inevitable because

the electrochemical characteristics of each cell,

including capacity, voltage and internal resistance,

cannot be identical. More importantly, the heat trans-

fer efﬁciency within the battery pack varies with the

cells positions and the pack layout. Fig. 1 exempliﬁes

that the side cells have a lower temperature compared

to the other cells in between due to more convection

heat transfer on the side (Akbarzadeh et al., 2020).

Also, the temperature on the bottom of the module is

higher than the other areas owing to the lower thermal

conductivity on the bottom interface (Akbarzadeh

et al., 2020). Temperature maldistribution at the

battery pack level, however, can be minimized with

improved BTMS design.

(a)

Temperature ℃

46.0

44.4

42.8

41.2

39.6

38.0

36.4

34.8

33.2

31.6

30.0

(b)

Figure 1: Temperature distribution on the module surface,

(a) 1C discharge and (b) 2C discharge. (Akbarzadeh et al.,

2020).

Individual Cell Level. Temperature distribution of

a single cell is also uneven since the current den-

sity is higher in electrode regions, as illustrated in

Fig. 2 (Jeon, 2014; Xu et al., 2015). However, the

temperature distribution mainly depends on the cell

shapes. The prismatic and pouch cells are expected

to have higher temperature in the tabs regions, while

the cylindrical cell is expected to have signiﬁcantly

higher temperature in the core region than at its sur-

face (Inui et al., 2007; Tomaszewska et al., 2019).

The simulation results of Wang et al. (Wang et al.,

2015a) demonstrated that the prismatic cell’s surface

temperature difference could range from ∼10°C (at

2.1C) to ∼20°C (at 5C) during discharging, as illus-

trated in Fig. 3. While Fleckensteinet al.’s (Fleck-

enstein et al., 2011) study indicated that the surface

temperature distribution for the cylindrical cell was

still fairly even, but the core temperature was signiﬁ-

cantly higher than its surface, which was ∼20°C dif-

ference at 6530 s with 70A pulse cycles, as illustrated

in Fig. 4. Admittedly, the surface temperature dis-

tribution for any shape of cells cannot be perfectly

even but enough to be neglected in low C-rate ther-

mal modelling. Jeon (Jeon, 2014) built a transient

thermo-electric model of Lithium-ion battery to pre-

dict the temperature distribution inside the cell. Fig.

5 illustrates the temperature distribution of a cylindri-

cal Lithium-ion battery at 1C discharge and charge,

respectively (Jeon, 2014). The temperature contours

presented that the maximum temperature was found

below the centre of the cell, and the minimum tem-

perature was observed at the top cap. Nevertheless,

the overall cell surface temperature difference was un-

der 3°C and the main body (except for the cap re-

gion where there is no chemical reaction happening)

surface temperature difference was under 1°C, which

was insigniﬁcant. Likewise, Xu et al.’s (Xu et al.,

2015) simulation results (see Fig. 6) indicated that

VEHITS 2022 - 8th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

although a prismatic LiFePO

battery had higher tem-

perature in tab region, the maximum temperature dif-

ference were only 0.3°C and 1°C at 1C and 2C dis-

charge, receptively. Noticeably, temperatures at the

positive tab area were normally higher than those near

the negative tab due to the lower ohmic resistivity of

the copper current collector on the anode side com-

pared to aluminium on the cathode side (Xu et al.,

2015).

8.9239×10

×10

(A/m^2)

1.4

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

3997

(a)

8.9317×10

(A/m^2)

×10

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

4015

(b)

(c)

Figure 2: Current distribution in the prismatic cell (a) neg-

ative and (b) positive current collectors, and (c) cylindri-

cal cell during 1C discharge process (Jeon, 2014; Xu et al.,

2015).

44.151 Max ℃

41.1806

39.461

37.116

34.771

32.427

30.082

27.737

25.392

23.047 Min

(a)

77.921 Max ℃

72.04

66.159

60.278

54.397

48.516

42.634

36.753

30.872

24.991 Min

(b)

Figure 3: Maximum temperature distribution in a com-

mercial LiFePO

battery (capacity: 7000 mAh, size: 118

mm×63 mm×13 mm), provided by ANSYS, for 15 and 35

A discharger (Wang et al., 2015a).

Figure 4: Simulated (a) temperature distribution, (b) current

density distribution inside the LiFePO

cell directly at the

end of the single cell cycle (t = 6530 s).

313.2

313.0

312.7

312.5

312.3

312.1

311.8

311.6

311.4

311.2

310.9

310.7

310.5

T (K)

Max (313.2 K)

(a)

T (K)

308.6

308.5

308.3

308.2

308.0

307.9

307.7

307.6

307.4

307.3

307.1

306.0

306.8

T (K)

(b)

Figure 5: Temperature distribution of cylindrical Li-ion bat-

tery at the end of 1C (a) discharge and (b) charge (Jeon,

2014).

(a) (b)

Figure 6: Temperature distribution of a prismatic LFP cell

discharging at (a) 1C rate at 1020 s, and (b) 2C rate at 990 s

(Xu et al., 2015).

In summary, the prismatic or pouch cell is ex-

pected to have a more signiﬁcant non-uniformity in

surface temperature distribution issue than the cylin-

drical cell under a high C-rate condition, while un-

der a low C-rate condition, any shapes of cells sur-

face temperature maldistribution can be reasonably

neglected. This phenomenon may raise the atten-

tion to the speciﬁc BTMS designs corresponding to

the different shapes of cells with various C-rate con-

ditions to save computational cost and design com-

plexity. To control the battery temperature from

shape and C-rate aspects, there are various thermal

mediums for different application ﬁelds, e.g., air for

heat/cooling/ventilation, liquid for cooling/heating,

Battery Thermal Management Systems for EVs and Its Applications: A Review

refrigerant for cooling, phase change material (PCM)

for thermal storage, heat pipe for cooling, or a com-

bination of these methods (Pesaran, 2001). To date,

air, liquid and refrigerant-based BMTS are the most

prevalent ones for the commercial EVs (Wu et al.,

2019).

2.1 Air Cooling BTMS

The air-based system is simple, reliable, economical,

and electrically safe because air is ubiquitous and has

perfect dielectric property. Thus, no isolation preven-

tions are required between coolant media and cells,

which helps air-based BTMS ﬂexibly adapt to any

shape of commercial cells. Also, due to the absence of

liquid coolant, battery-swapping systems can be sig-

niﬁcantly simpliﬁed. Air BTMSs utilise blowers (Fig.

7) or an air conditioning unit (Fig. 7) to actively ad-

just the battery temperature. It manages to acquire

higher efﬁciency than the natural one but can poten-

tially be a noise source. Besides, voluminous ducts

and blowers increase the cost, volume, and weight of

BTMS and introduce parasitic power consumption,

which acts contrary to the air-based system merits

(Basu et al., 2016). Current studies mainly focus on

the optimisations of the cell layout, airﬂow channel,

or combined with other cooling strategies to mitigate

the air BTMS shortfalls (Basu et al., 2016; Jang and

Rhi, 2010; Wang et al., 2015b).

Cell Layout. An appropriate cell arrangement inside

the battery pack is essential for an efﬁcient cooling

system. Poor cell layout designs can inhibit heat dis-

sipation, induce heat accumulation inside the battery

pack during EVs operations, and cause safety haz-

ards. Various studies have been conducted on the

cell’s channels. Yang et al. (Yang et al., 2015) numer-

ically investigated the cooling performances under 2C

discharging rate with aligned arrangement (Fig. 8)

and staggered arrangement (Fig. 8) for cylindrical

cells based on a commercial FE solver at different am-

bient temperatures (at 5°C, 15°C, 25°C). They sim-

ulated various battery conﬁgurations related to the

cell’s transverse gap (S

) and longitudinal gap (S

)

and computationally derived that the aligned layout

was the optimal conﬁguration choice for their case re-

garding the least maximum temperature, temperature

difference and total power consumption. Their results

also agreed with Fan et al.’s work (Fan et al., 2019)

that aligned arrangement had the best cooling perfor-

mance, energy effectiveness and temperature unifor-

mity. Additionally, Fan et al. proposed a new cross ar-

rangement in their studies illustrated in Fig. 8, which

had better cooling performance than the staggered one

but still less performant than the aligned arrangement,

due to the cross structures for air cooling enhanced the

local convective heat transfer, which exacerbated the

temperature differences among the cells (Fan et al.,

2019).

Airﬂow Channel. Channel design mainly focuses

on the inlet/outlet size, air duct angle and airﬂow di-

rection. Yang et al. (Yang et al., 2015) simulated

different inlet width’s inﬂuence on the cooling per-

formance, temperature uniformity, cooling efﬁciency

and determined that when inlet width equalled 0.5S

the system achieved the optimal performance. Com-

pared to the inlet width of 1.0S

, the maximum tem-

perature difference among the cells reduced 0.5°C,

and the power requirement decreased by 2.3% and

cooling efﬁciency increased by 1.7%. Regarding the

air duct angle optimisation, Xie et al. (Xie et al.,

2017) adjusted the inlet and outlet air duct angles to

modify the airﬂow inside the battery pack as illus-

trated in Fig. 9. They showed that the lowest system

temperature and temperature difference are obtained

where the inlet and outlet angle are both 2.5°. The

maximum temperature and the temperature difference

are decreased by 12.82% and 29.72%, respectively.

As for the airﬂow direction research, various airﬂow

path conﬁgurations have been proposed and can be

mainly classiﬁed into three types: U-type, Z-type, and

other novel types, see Fig. 10. U- and Z-type are the

conventional conﬁgurations. The U-type battery pack

, where the pack inlet and outlet are located at the

same side, introduces cooling air from the lower duct,

and cool air ﬂows through the cooling channels be-

tween two adjacent battery cooling plates, and eventu-

ally, the hot air exhausts from the upper vent through

the pack outlet (Solyali and Akinlabi, 2020). Contrar-

ily, the Z-type battery pack, the inlet and the outlet are

located on the opposite sides. The outlet for conven-

tional conﬁgurations is ﬁxed, Li et al. (Liu and Zhang,

2019) therefore proposed a novel J-type airﬂow con-

ﬁguration with two outlets controlled by valves to en-

hance the cooling ﬂexibility. The least temperature

rise and temperature differences are achieved in the

J-type conﬁguration that the maximum temperature

difference was 3°C compared to 5°C for the conven-

tional layouts (Liu and Zhang, 2019).

In general, air BTMS offers various advantages

such as low cost, space compactness, leakage-free,

and lightweight. Whereas, the main disadvantages of

air-based BTMS are the low thermal conductivity and

heat capacity which tremendously limited its cooling

performance and can form a high-temperature gradi-

ent inside the battery pack. Also, this may impose

constraints on the assembling location of the battery

pack on EVs. Therefore, air cooling BTMS is adopted

by a few EV manufacturers nowadays.

VEHITS 2022 - 8th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

Battery packBlowerAmbient air Exhaust air

Exhaust air

(a)

Cabin Battery pack Exhaust airHVACBlowerAmbient air

Exhaust air

(b)

Figure 7: Schematic design of (a) an air-based battery cooling system using only ambient air, and (b) with preconditioned

cabin air(Scrosati et al., 2015).

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 8: Schematics plan view of forced air convection

system for cells arrayed in: (a) Aligned (b) Staggered (c)

Cross (Fan et al., 2019).

2.2 Liquid Cooling BTMS

Liquid cooling is the most prevalent thermal manage-

ment method on BTMS owing to its high cooling per-

formance, increased maintainability, moderate power

consumption, rapid thermal response, and suitablity

for both cooling and preheating conditions compared

to those of the air-based BTMS (Zhang et al., 2017).

Signiﬁcant cooling performance and good controlla-

bility also qualify liquid-based BTMS for challenging

state-of-the-art concepts such as fast charging or ex-

Figure 9: Battery pack structure, where A is the height of

the end of the inlet, B is the height of the end of the outlet

(Xie et al., 2017).

Exhaust air

Cooling air

Figure 10: U-, Z-, and J-type BTMS and their temperature

distributions (Liu and Zhang, 2019; Solyali and Akinlabi,

2020).

treme climate conditions operations (Scrosati et al.,

2015). Consequently, the use of liquid cooling sys-

tems is a practical option for commercial BTMS ap-

plications and has already been extensively imple-

Battery Thermal Management Systems for EVs and Its Applications: A Review

mented by automobile manufactures, including Tesla,

BMW, General Motors, BYD (Scrosati et al., 2015;

Wu et al., 2019; He et al., 2015; Thakur et al., 2020).

In liquid cooling BTMS, cells and cooling medium

are separated by the heat conducting materials. The

generated heat is conducted from the battery into the

cooling medium and removed via circulation. Thus,

strict isolation between cells and coolant is crucial

to cooling liquid since water, glycol, acetone, or re-

frigerants can be ﬂammable, hazardous, or conduc-

tive and can cause devastating consequences such as

ﬁre and short circuit if leakage occurs (Wang et al.,

2015b; Sund

en, 2019). Thus, additional channel ma-

terials and electrical insulating coatings are neces-

sary for liquid cooling BTMS. As a trade-off, the

system’s thermal resistance is elevated, and the con-

tact resistance at the contacting interfaces between

cells and conductors can inhibit the heat transfer and

form local hotspots, which weakens the thermal per-

formance of the pack accordingly (Basu et al., 2016;

Thakur et al., 2020). The typical indirect liquid-based

BTMS design for EVs tempts to a liquid and air cool-

ing combination and enable to switch between each

mode dynamically. Fig. 11 depict a schematic of a

typical indirect liquid cooling system on EV where

the air cooling is utilised under the normal opera-

tions and switching to refrigerating loop by a three-

way valve in peak loads or high ambient temperatures

circumstances to further cool down the liquid via a

chiller (Scrosati et al., 2015). The chiller shown in

Fig. 11 is a machine acting as a heat exchanger that

coupled the coolant and refrigerant circuits together

and allows the coolant to be further cooled down via

the air-conditioning system on EV. This concept has

been adopted by the Chevrolet Volt and Tesla vehi-

cles (Scrosati et al., 2015). The liquid cooling BTMS

can be classiﬁed into two types: cold plate and dis-

crete tube, according to the approaches of passing the

liquid through the channel.

Coolant circuit

Refrigerant circuit

EI. heater

Coolant pump

Cooling plate

3-way valve

Compressor

Condenser

Evaporator

Chiller

Cooler

Battery Pack

Figure 11: Dual cooling system comprising coolant and re-

frigerant circuit (Scrosati et al., 2015).

Cold Plate. The cooling plate is a ﬂat shape metal

plate made with internal tubes where a cooling liquid

is ﬂowing in serpentine or concentric channels, and

the heat is dissipated by convection (Wu et al., 2019).

The prismatic cell modules mostly adopt it due to its

large contact area. The typical arrangements of cold

plates include the sandwich form and the side form

that the plates are inserted between the adjacent cells

as the sandwich form or placed on the side/bottom of

the module as the side form, as illustrated in Fig. 12

(Wu et al., 2019; Sund

en, 2019). Cold plates present

an economical solution for liquid cooling. Neverthe-

less, the parasitic mass should also be considered in

the BTMS design.

Coolant

Battery

Jacket

(a)

Heat spreader

Cold plate

nto battery monomer (b) Between adjacent cells

(QHUJ\&RQYHUVLRQDQG0DQDJHPHQW²



(b)

Figure 12: Schematics of the cold-plate based liquid cool-

ing: (a) sandwich form (b) side form (Wu et al., 2019;

Sund

en, 2019).

The cold plate thermal performance has been ex-

tensively studied. Chen et al. (Chen et al., 2016) in-

vestigated the cooling performance of the sandwich

form and the side form. The temperature difference

of the sandwich form was the largest. The initial

temperature difference reached the peak value with

the increasing ﬂow rate (approximately 7°C), and de-

creased afterwards. While the overall battery temper-

ature was continuously decreasing with the increasing

ﬂow velocity. Chen et al. explained this was because

of the long coolant channel and high thermal conduc-

tivity of the coolant and emphasised that the low mass

ﬂow rates in liquid cooling BTMS should be avoided.

However, higher mass ﬂow indicates higher power

consumption. To balance the temperature difference

and the power consumption, Zhang et al. (Zhang

et al., 2017) proposed a cascade cooling method with

variable inlet coolant temperatures that utilised the

sandwich form with ﬂat tubes assisted by the high

thermal conductivity graphite to enhance the heat

transfer, as illustrated in Fig. 13. In their cooling tests,

the initial inlet coolant temperature was identical to

the initial battery temperature and they gradually de-

creased the coolant temperature to cool down the bat-

tery. In this way, the least temperature difference (be-

low 5°C) and power consumption were obtained . The

total time to achieve a steady-state for the cascade

VEHITS 2022 - 8th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

cooling was approximately 2 min longer than that

of constant low-temperature coolant cooling, but the

steady-state temperatures of the two different meth-

ods were basically consistent, which is regarded as

an acceptable trade-off. Other than the side form, the

bottom form is also adopted in some studies. Smith et

al. (Smith et al., 2014) deployed a cold plate under-

neath the prismatic SANYO/PANASONIC PHEV-2,

25 Ah Lithium-ion cells, as illustrated in Fig. 14. In

their study, Smith et al. treated the cells as a spa-

tially uniform heat source. This is supported by the

fact that the PHEV2 cell has a thick case leading to

the lower conduction rate, and the temperature gradi-

ents are therefore not noticeable. However, it is still

worth emphasising that the bottom cooling conﬁgura-

tion may not be the most effective approach to dissi-

pate the heat because, in real situations, the cell’s lo-

cal temperature around tabs is hotter than the bottom

area due to the higher current density there (Sund

en,

2019).

End plate

Outlet

Cell

Flexible

graphite

Flexible

graphite

Cell

Flat tube

bank

Flat

tube

Inlet

Figure 13: Designed battery pack and layout of the temper-

ature measured points (Zhang et al., 2017).

Figure 14: The layout of a battery module for SANYO pris-

matic cells. (Smith et al., 2014).

The previous methods are all based on prismatic

cells. Basu et al. (Basu et al., 2016) designed a novel

side form BTMS for cylindrical cells to investigate

the applicability of cold pate cooling for cylindrical

cells. The Li-NCA/C 18650 cells were wrapped by

the aluminium conduction elements and the heat

from cells was conducted to the side aluminium

channels carrying coolant liquid, as illustrated in Fig.

15. This structure also achieves leak-proof design

because of separation of conduction element owing

to the conduction elements separate the coolant and

cells. In respect to the thermal performance, the cell’s

temperature could be maintained under 27°C (at 0.9C

discharging rate), 28°C (at 1.8C discharging rate),

30°C (at 2.7C discharging rate) when the coolant inlet

temperature was 23°C and ﬂow velocity was 0.2 m/s.

It revealed the excellent thermal performance of the

proposed BTMS. Nevertheless, the thermal contact

resistances at the conduction elements and cells

interfaces were found to be the biggest hindrance to

such BTMS conﬁguration.

Channel

Conducon Element

18650 cells

Coolant ﬂow

Channel

Cells

Coolant ﬂow

Conduction element

Coolant ﬂow

Figure 15: Geometry of the pack and the BTMS for the

cylindrical cells based battery pack (Basu et al., 2016).

Discrete Tube. Discrete tubes are more applicable

for cylindrical batteries due to their more ﬂexible

shape compared to the cold plate. A representative

of discrete tube design is from Tesla, Inc where they

adopted ribbon-shaped tubes with a wave proﬁle on

their Model S EV. Fig. 16 is a top-down view of a por-

tion of a cooling tube with a wavy or scalloped proﬁle

(Tennessen et al., 2014). The illustrated shape of the

cooling tube serves several purposes. First, it allows

a larger area portion of each cell to be in thermal con-

tact with the cooling tubes, thereby improving heat

transfer. Second, it can achieve higher packing den-

sity of cylindrical cells battery pack by minimising the

separation distance between adjacent cell rows. The

overall discrete tube layout of the Tesla Model S is

depicted in Fig. 17 (R. Maughan, 2021).

2.3 Refrigerant BTMS

A typical liquid cooling BTMS conﬁguration is illus-

trated in Fig. 11, which contains two circulations -

the coolant circulation and the refrigerant circulation

Battery Thermal Management Systems for EVs and Its Applications: A Review

Figure 16: A top-down view of a portion of a cooling

tube inserted between a plurality of cells (Tennessen et al.,

2014).

Water glycol inlet

Water glycol outlet

Figure 17: The schematic of Tesla Model S discrete tube

cooling: tube is lagged with high heat transfer material and

in close contact with side of cells (R. Maughan, 2021).

coupled by a chiller. Such design adds weight and

complexity to the system. Thus, refrigerant BTMS

has been proposed to overcome the disadvantage of

the dual-circuit model. In refrigerant BTMS, the bat-

tery cooling circuit is directly integrated into the ex-

isting refrigerant cycle on EV. Therefore, the chiller

and coolant exchange circuits can be entirely removed

from the refrigerant system, which more weight and is

more compact than the liquid-based BTMS (Scrosati

et al., 2015). Also, the refrigerant has a lower elec-

trical conductivity which reduces the possibility of a

short circuit (Bhattacharjee et al., 2020). In practical

applications, the conﬁgurations of refrigerant cooling

BTMS resemble the cold plates liquid cooling in the

way that heat sinks with embedded microchannels are

installed on the top and bottom sides of the module

(see Fig. 18 ) and absorb the heat from the mod-

ules. On the down side, the refrigerant BTMS cannot

perform the heating of the battery, as may be needed

in cold environments. This is because the refrigerant

cannot be heated. Thus, refrigerant BTMS will not

be able to preheat the battery in a cold environment

(Lu et al., 2020) and common solution is applying an

extra electric heater to the battery (Roth et al., 2004).

Refrigerant

inlet

Refrigerant

outlet

Cell

Heat sink

Mini-channel

Figure 18: Diagram of refrigerant BTMS in practical appli-

cations form (Katoch and Eswaramoorthy, 2020; Lu et al.,

2020).

The merit of the refrigerant cooling lies in that

the refrigerant directly ﬂows into the battery modules

without a secondary heat transfer assisted by a chiller.

Therefore, the refrigerant BTMS has a higher evap-

oration heat transfer coefﬁcient, heat transfer effec-

tiveness and simplicity compared to the liquid cool-

ing BTMS. Hong et al. (Hong et al., 2020) experi-

mentally investigated the thermal performance of di-

rect two-phase refrigerant cooling. Due to its com-

pact structure with mini channels, the weight of the

cooling module was approximately 56% lower than

that of the liquid cooling. They adopted R134a re-

frigerant as the cooling ﬂuid compared to the ethy-

lene glycol/water mixture (50:50) - a popular liquid

coolant choice for EV manufacturers. Their results

indicated that the maximum temperature of two-phase

refrigerant cooling was 41.1°C under 2C fast charg-

ing conditions while that of the liquid cooling was

49.1°C, exceeding the cell’s allowed operational tem-

perature. During the regular charging and US06 drive

cycle tests, although refrigerant and liquid cooling

maintained the maximum temperature under 30°C,

the overall maximum temperature of refrigerant cool-

ing was consistently lower than that of liquid cooling

during the whole process. As for the temperature dif-

ference, both cooling methods maintained the max-

imum temperature gradients below 5°C under 0.5C-

2C charging rates conditions when liquid coolant tem-

perature was 25°C, and the refrigerant vapour quality

(χ = mass

vapour

/mass

total

) was 0.85, respectively.

It should emphasise that R134a, as the most pop-

ular refrigerant, has been banned by the European

Union for its usage on new cars after 2022. Due

to R134a belongs to ﬂuorinated greenhouse gas with

high global warming potential (GWP), GWP=1410

(Schwarz et al., 2011). Hong et al. (Hong et al.,

2020) proposed R1234yf (GWP= 4) as an alternative

to R134a, but R1234yf is highly ﬂammable. The fu-

ture developments point toward making the liquid car-

bon dioxide - R744 (GWP=1, non-ozone depleting,

non-toxic, non-ﬂammable) the standard (Hoffmann,

2017).

3 BTMS APPLICATIONS ON EVs

The growth of EVs has soared over the last ﬁve years

(IEA, 2021). The representative newer manufactur-

ers include fast-growing companies e.g., Tesla, NIO,

and the established automakers e.g., BMW, Nissan,

GM, Renault There were about 7.2 million electric

cars on the world’s roads by 2019, among which

the HEV(hybrid EV) and PHEV(plug-in hybrid EV)

dominated in the early 2010, while BEV (battery EV)

VEHITS 2022 - 8th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

started to take over the market after 2015 (IEA, 2021).

According to The Global EV Outlook Report (IEA,

2021), BEV is expected to reach an average driving

range of 350-400 km corresponding to battery sizes

of 70-80 kWh by 2030, which offers similar ranges to

an average fuel car (Wallbox, 2021). Therefore, EV

manufacturers are pursuing for higher speciﬁc energy

and speciﬁc power batteries to complete the full trans-

action from PHEV/HEV to BEV and be more com-

petitive against the fuel vehicles. In 2019, Chevro-

let halted production of PHEV - Chevrolet Volt se-

ries and replaced with a new BEV series - Chevrolet

Bolt (Jordan Fromholz, 2021). In June 2021, Model

S, as Tesla’s ﬂagship originally launched in 2012, and

equipped with a 100 kWh battery powertrain and the

maximum driving range reached 637 km under WLTP

test (Electric Vehicle Database, 2021; Mock et al.,

2014). In January of the same year, NIO announced

their ﬁrst saloon - ET7, which equipped with an even

larger 150 kWh solid-state battery and estimated driv-

ing range reached 1000 km under NEDC test (Mock

et al., 2014; NIO, 2021). Due to the increased battery

capacity and battery generated heat in driving surges,

more efﬁcient and powerful BTMS are required to se-

cure EVs safety and performance. Table 1 summaries

the main commercial EVs on the market to date and

introduced their BTMSs, speciﬁcations and perfor-

mance. It indicates that due to the increased battery

capacity, the driving range of newer BEVs has be-

come similar to fossil fuel vehicles. Meanwhile, the

mainstream BTMS methods for EVs are still limited

to air, liquid, and refrigerant based BTMSs, where liq-

uid BTMS is the optimum choice for most EV manu-

facturers to date.

Air BTMS. Due to the simplicity of air cooling

BTMS, forced convection air cooling has been pre-

sented in commercial EVs at the earliest stage. The

earliest hybrid EVs (HEVs), such as Honda Insight

and Toyota Prius (Fig. 19), are the early examples

adopting the air cooling approach and proved the fea-

sibility of air cooling BTMS (Zolot et al., 2001; Zolot

et al., 2002; Scrosati et al., 2015). More recently, a

representative BEV - Renault Zoe 2019 adopted an

air conditioning unit system to blow cool air over the

battery (G

eraldine Dao, 2019).

Battery pack

Ducts

Blower/fan

Figure 19: Toyota Prius Battery Pack including air ducts

(Roth et al., 2004).

Liquid BTMS. As the most prevalent cooling

method, liquid BTMS has been adopted by various

automobile manufactures. Tesla’s BTMS implements

liquid glycol as a coolant distributed throughout the

battery pack to transfer heat to the refrigeration cycle

and utilises electric resistance heating in cold weather.

GM adopts prismatic cells instead named Ultium bat-

teries that ﬂat cell pouches can stack on top of each

other to save more space, illustrated in Fig.20 and

cooled with aluminium cooling plates with embedded

mini channels ﬁlled with liquid glycol (R. Maughan,

2021; George Bower, 2015; GM, 2020a). Such mod-

ular design offers a signiﬁcant ﬂexible energy com-

binations availability that can range from 50 kWh to

over 200 kWh. Thus, engineers can customize various

battery capacities for different EV models. Addition-

ally, the mini-channel cooling approach can minimize

the installation limitations compared to air cooling

BTMS, which can translate to more miles on a single

charge with less volume (GM, 2020a; GM, 2020b).

Figure 20: GM’s new automotive battery packs consist

of ﬂat stackable Ultium cells with an aluminium cooling

plate sandwiched between them (George Bower, 2015; GM,

2020a).

Refrigerant BTMS. It has been adopted in some

EV models. BMW is the representative manufacture

in favour of the refrigerant cooling method. BMW

i3, as a lightweight EV, adopted a 42.2kWh battery,

and driving range reached 246 km (Boretti, 2020).

BMW i3 contains much less ﬂuid compared to Tesla

Model 3 since it adopts the refrigerants from the air

conditioning system and only requires a small upsiz-

ing of the air conditioning compressor to compen-

sate for increased refrigerant demand (Munro, 2020).

Thus, the weight of the cooling system only com-

poses about 3% of the total battery weight (Schoewel

and Hochgeiger, 2014). Regarding the thermal per-

formance, the BMW i3 utilises a bottom cooling plate

in its battery, elucidated in Fig. 21, which have only

module-level contact to the coolant system. There-

fore, temperature control performance can be less ef-

ﬁcient than the Tesla Models, whereas the assembly

and maintenance complexity has been signiﬁcantly

decreased (Munro, 2020; Schoewel and Hochgeiger,

2014).

Battery Thermal Management Systems for EVs and Its Applications: A Review

Table 1: BTMS Strategies of Commercial Vehicles.

Year Model Type BTMS Capacity

(kWh)

Battery Range

(km)

Reference

2015 BMW i8 PHEV Refrigerant 7.1-11.6 37 (Loveday, 2014)

2019 Renault Zoe BEV Forced Air 52 394 (Delobel et al., 2017;

eraldine Dao, 2019)

2019 Chevrolet Volt PHEV Cold Plate 18.4 85 (Loveday, 2020; GM, 2011)

2019 Kia Niro BEV Liquid 64 385 (Halvorson, 2019; Kane,

2019; Nisewanger, 2019)

2019 MINI SE BEV Liquid 32.6 225 -233 (Boeriu, 2020; Mini, 2021;

Moloughney, 2020)

2020 Porsche Taycan BEV Liquid 79-93 408-484 (Auto Express, 2021)

2020 Hyundai Kona BEV Cold Plate 64 482 (Nisewanger, 2018; Hyundai,

2011)

2020 Hyundai IONIQ BEV Fan 38 310 (Hyundai, 2021)

2020 Volkswagen ID.3 BEV Cold Plate 45-77 349-540 (Volkswagen, 2020)

2021 BMW i3 BEV Refrigerant 37.9 292-305 (BMW, 2021; Munro, 2020)

2021 Tesla Model S BEV Discrete

Tube

100 637-652 (Electric Vehicle Database,

2021; Tesla, 2021b)

2021 Tesla Model 3 BEV Discrete

Tube

54 - 82 447-579 (Tesla, 2021a)

Figure 21: BMW i3 bottom refrigerant cooling plate layout

(Munro, 2020).

4 CONCLUSIONS

Nowadays, the use of Lithium-ion batteries in EVs

tends to have higher energy density, power and

more compact design, which requires more advanced

BTMSs to enhance the prospects of safety, reliability

and performance. This paper extensively reviews and

classiﬁes the current commercial BTMS on EVs ac-

cording to its cooling medium. Air cooling, as the ear-

liest BTMS on EVs, has the advantages of low weight,

low cost and easy maintenance, but low cooling per-

formance is the main bottleneck limiting its utilisa-

tion on the current EVs. The common trend in the

past years has been to move from air BTMS to liquid

BTMS to gain a more powerful cooling ability and in-

crease the vehicle range accordingly. Liquid cooling

BTMS is the most prevalent cooling method to EV

manufacturers to date and also expected to dominant

the EV market in the future. Whereas, the leakage,

increment of parasitic mass, and higher design com-

plexity and price are the main disadvantages of liq-

uid BTMS. The refrigerant BTMS therefore becomes

an option to some EV manufactures as it has lower

design complexity, weight, and cost, but the cooling

performance is less efﬁcient than the liquid BTMS

and needs an extra heating system to heat up batter-

ies. Currently, it is a popular solution to the low cost

EVs. For the future BTMS design, the light weight,

low cooling power consumption, and higher thermal

conductivity BTMS integrating with multiple cool-

ing methods will be a possible solution to the current

facing limitations. Moreover, advanced but currently

with low techonology readiness levels BTMSs such

as heat pipe, phase change materials, and thermoelec-

tric can also potentially be the future solutions to EVs,

but this is beyond the scope of this work.

REFERENCES

Akbarzadeh, M., Kalogiannis, T., Jaguemont, J., He, J., Jin,

L., Berecibar, M., and Van Mierlo, J. (2020). Ther-

mal modeling of a high-energy prismatic lithium-ion

battery cell and module based on a new thermal char-

acterization methodology. Journal of Energy Storage,

32:101707.

Auto Express (2021). Porsche taycan review -

range, charging and running costs. https://

www.autoexpress.co.uk/porsche/taycan/range.

Basu, S., Hariharan, K. S., Kolake, S. M., Song, T., Sohn,

D. K., and Yeo, T. (2016). Coupled electrochemical

thermal modelling of a novel li-ion battery pack ther-

mal management system. Applied Energy, 181:1–13.

Bhattacharjee, A., Mohanty, R. K., and Ghosh, A. (2020).

Design of an optimized thermal management system

for li-ion batteries under different discharging condi-

tions. Energies, 13(21).

VEHITS 2022 - 8th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

BMW (2021). Technical data of the bmw i3.

https://www.bmw.co.uk/en/all-models/bmw-i/i3/

2020/technical-data.BMW--i3-120Ah.html.

Boeriu (2020). Mini cooper se – technical details and spec-

iﬁcations. https://www.bmwblog.com/2020/01/18/

mini-cooper-se-technical-details-and-speciﬁcations/.

Boretti, A. (2020). On-board electric vehicles electricity

production by high-efﬁciency internal combustion en-

gines. Przegad Elektrotechniczny, 96.

Chen, D., Jiang, J., Kim, G. H., Yang, C., and Pesaran, A.

(2016). Comparison of different cooling methods for

lithium ion battery cells. Applied Thermal Engineer-

ing, 94.

Delobel, B., Gordon, I. J., and Leveau, L. (2017). Zoe bat-

tery durability, ﬁeld experience and future vision. Re-

nault Battery Development Department.

Electric Vehicle Database (2021). Model s long

rnage. https://ev-database.uk/car/1404/Tesla-Model-

S-Long-Range.

Fan, Y., Bao, Y., Ling, C., Chu, Y., Tan, X., and Yang, S.

(2019). Experimental study on the thermal manage-

ment performance of air cooling for high energy den-

sity cylindrical lithium-ion batteries. Applied Thermal

Engineering.

Fleckenstein, M., Bohlen, O., Roscher, M. A., and B

aker,

B. (2011). Current density and state of charge inho-

mogeneities in li-ion battery cells with lifepo4 as cath-

ode material due to temperature gradients. Journal of

Power Sources, 196(10):4769–4778.

George Bower (2015). Tesla or gm: Who

has the best battery thermal management?

https://insideevs.com/photo/3957897/tesla-or-gm-

who-has-the-best-battery-thermal-management/.

GM (2011). Cooling ﬁns help keep chevrolet volt battery

at ideal temperature. https://media.gm.com/media/us/

en/gm/home.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/

2011/Feb/0214 battery.html.

GM (2020a). Flat, stackable ev batteries are the

winning formula. https://www.gm.com/our-stories/

technology/ﬂat-battery-stackable-ev.html.

GM (2020b). Gm reveals all-new ﬂexible platform and

ultium batteries. https://www.gm.com/our-stories/

commitment/ev-battery-modular-technology.html.

eraldine Dao (2019). Pre-conditioning

and your electric car’s range.

https://easyelectriclife.groupe.renault.com/en/day-to-

day/range/pre-conditioning-and-your-electric-cars-

range/.

Halvorson (2019). 2019 kia niro ev: ﬁrst drive of 239-mile

electric crossover. https://www.greencarreports.com/

news/1121294 2019-kia-niro-ev-ﬁrst-drive-of-239-

mile-electric-crossover.

He, W., Zhang, G., Zhang, X., Ji, J., Li, G., and Zhao,

X. (2015). Recent development and application of

thermoelectric generator and cooler. Applied Energy,

143:1–25.

Hoffmann, G. (2017). Refrigerants for mobile air condi-

tioning. ATZ worldwide, 119(1):16–21.

Hong, S. H., Jang, D. S., Park, S., Yun, S., and Kim, Y.

(2020). Thermal performance of direct two-phase re-

frigerant cooling for lithium-ion batteries in electric

vehicles. Applied Thermal Engineering, 173:115213.

Hyundai (2011). New kona electric. https://

www.hyundai.co.uk/new-cars/kona-electric.

Hyundai (2021). Ioniq electric, pure electric, pure satis-

faction. https://www.hyundai.co.uk/new-cars/ioniq/

electric.

IEA (2021). Global electric car stock, 2010-2019, iea, paris.

https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/global-

electric-car-stock-2010-2019.

Inui, Y., Kobayashi, Y., Watanabe, Y., Watase, Y., and Ki-

tamura, Y. (2007). Simulation of temperature distri-

bution in cylindrical and prismatic lithium ion sec-

ondary batteries. Energy Conversion and Manage-

ment, 48(7):2103–2109.

Jang, J.-C. and Rhi, S.-H. (2010). Battery thermal man-

agement system of future electric vehicles with loop

thermosyphon.

Jeon, D. H. (2014). Numerical modeling of lithium ion bat-

tery for predicting thermal behavior in a cylindrical

cell. Current Applied Physics, 14(2):196–205.

Jordan Fromholz (2021). The chevy volt vs. bolt: The dif-

ferences. The Chevy Volt vs. Bolt: The Differences.

Kane (2019). Everything we know about the 2019 kia niro

ev (e-niro). https://insideevs.com/news/345556/2019-

kia-niro-ev-e-niro/.

Katoch, S. S. and Eswaramoorthy, M. (2020). A detailed

review on electric vehicles battery thermal manage-

ment system. In IOP Conference Series: Materials

Science and Engineering, volume 912, page 042005.

IOP Publishing.

Liu, Y. and Zhang, J. (2019). Design a j-type air-based bat-

tery thermal management system through surrogate-

based optimization. Applied Energy, 252.

Loveday (2014). First bmw i8 deliveries scheduled for

june - ﬁnal performance / fuel consumption ﬁg-

ures released. https://insideevs.com/news/320920/

ﬁrst-bmw-i8-deliveries-scheduled-for-june-ﬁnal-

performance-fuel-consumption-ﬁgures-released/.

Loveday (2020). 2016-2019 chevy volt review from honest

owner’s perspective. https://insideevs.com/reviews/

408403/2016-2019-chevrolet-volt-review/.

Lu, M., Zhang, X., Ji, J., Xu, X., and Zhang, Y. (2020).

Research progress on power battery cooling technol-

ogy for electric vehicles. Journal of Energy Storage,

27(Feb.):101155.1–101155.16.

Ma, S., Jiang, M., Tao, P., Song, C., Wu, J., Wang, J.,

Deng, T., and Shang, W. (2018). Temperature effect

and thermal impact in lithium-ion batteries: A review.

Progress in Natural Science: Materials International,

28(6):653–666.

Mini (2021). New mini electric. https://www.mini.co.uk/

GB/home/range/mini-electric.html.

Mock, P., K

uhlwein, J., Tietge, U., Franco, V., Bandi-

vadekar, A., and German, J. (2014). The wltp: How a

new test procedure for cars will affect fuel consump-

tion values in the eu. International council on clean

transportation, 9(3547).

Moloughney (2020). 2020 mini cooper se: Big

fun, short on range, but easy on the wal-

Battery Thermal Management Systems for EVs and Its Applications: A Review

let. https://insideevs.com/reviews/395747/2020-mini-

cooper-se-ﬁrst-drive-report/.

Motors, T., Berdichevsky, G., Kelty, K., Straubel, J., and

Toomre, E. (2007). The tesla roadster battery system.

tesla motors inc.

Munro (2020). Tearing down tesla segment 4: Battery

cooling system comparison on tesla model 3 vs.

bmw i3. https://leandesign.com/tearing-down-tesla-

segment-4-battery-cooling-system-comparison-on-

tesla-model-3-vs-bmw-i3/.

NIO (2021). Nio et7-ready for tomorrow-et7. https://

www.nio.com/et7.

Nisewanger (2018). Exclusive: details on hyundai’s

new battery thermal management design. https:

//electricrevs.com/2018/12/20/exclusive-details-on-

hyundais-new-battery-thermal-management-design/.

Nisewanger (2019). Lg sues sk, alleges stolen trade

secrets used to make kia niro and future vw batter-

ies. https://electricrevs.com/2019/04/30/lg-sues-sk-

alleges-stolen-trade-secrets-used-to-make-kia-niro-

and-future-vw-batteries/.

Pesaran, A. A. (2001). Battery thermal management in

ev and hevs: issues and solutions. Battery Man,

43(5):34–49.

R. Maughan (2021). What is the best electric vehicle battery

cooling system? https://avidtp.com/what-is-the-best-

cooling-system-for-electric-vehicle-battery-packs/.

Reddy, T. B. (2011). Linden’s handbook of batteries.

McGraw-Hill Education.

Roth, E. P., Crafts, C. C., Doughty, D. H., and McBreen, J.

(2004). Advanced technology development program

for lithium-ion batteries: thermal abuse performance

of 18650 li-ion cells. Sandia Nat. Lab., Albuquerque,

NM, USA, Rep. SAND2004-0584.

Schoewel, F. and Hochgeiger, E. (2014). The high-voltage

batteries of the bmw i3 and bmw i8. In Proceed-

ings of the Advanced Automotive Battery Conference

(AABC), Atlanta, GA, USA, volume 45.

Schwarz, W., Gschrey, B., Leisewitz, A., Herold, A., Gores,

S., Papst, I., Usinger, J., Oppelt, D., Croiset, I., Peder-

sen, P. H., et al. (2011). Preparatory study for a review

of regulation (ec) no 842/2006 on certain ﬂuorinated

greenhouse gases. Final report, Sept.

Scrosati, B., Garche, J., and Tillmetz, W. (2015). Advances

in battery technologies for electric vehicles. Wood-

head Publishing.

Slowik, P., Hall, D., Lutsey, N., Nicholas, M., and Wappel-

horst, S. (2019). Funding the transition to all zero-

emission vehicles. White Paper.

Smith, J., Hinterberger, M., Hable, P., and Koehler, J.

(2014). Simulative method for determining the op-

timal operating conditions for a cooling plate for

lithium-ion battery cell modules. Journal of Power

Sources, 267:784–792.

Solyali, D. and Akinlabi, A. (2020). Conﬁguration, de-

sign, and optimization of air-cooled battery ther-

mal management system for electric vehicles: A re-

view. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,

125(109815).

Sund

en, B. (2019). Hydrogen, Batteries and Fuel Cells.

Academic Press.

Tennessen, P. T., Weintraub, J. C., and Hermann, W. A.

(2014). Extruded and ribbed thermal interface for use

with a battery cooling system. US Patent 8,758,924.

Tesla (2021a). Model 3. https://www.tesla.com/en gb/

model3?redirect=no.

Tesla (2021b). Model s plain. https://ev-database.uk/car/

1405/Tesla-Model-S-Plaid.

Thakur, A. K., Prabakaran, R., Elkadeem, M., Sharshir,

S. W., Arıcı, M., Wang, C., Zhao, W., Hwang, J.-Y.,

and Saidur, R. (2020). A state of art review and future

viewpoint on advance cooling techniques for lithium–

ion battery system of electric vehicles. Journal of En-

ergy Storage, 32:101771.

Tomaszewska, A., Chu, Z., Feng, X., O’Kane, S., Liu, X.,

Chen, J., Ji, C., Endler, E., Li, R., Liu, L., et al. (2019).

Lithium-ion battery fast charging: A review. ETrans-

portation, 1:100011.

Volkswagen (2020). Battery and charging options.

https://www.volkswagen-newsroom.com/en/the-

new-id3-6240/battery-and-charging-options-6247.

Wallbox (2021). How do evs compare to gas cars?

https://blog.wallbox.com/how-do-evs-compare-to-

gas-cars/.

Wang, C., Lin, T., Huang, J., and Rao, Z. (2015a). Tempera-

ture response of a high power lithium-ion battery sub-

jected to high current discharge. Materials Research

Innovations, 19(sup2):S2–156.

Wang, Q., Jiang, B., Xue, Q. F., Sun, H. L., Li, B., Zou,

H. M., and Yan, Y. Y. (2015b). Experimental investi-

gation on ev battery cooling and heating by heat pipes.

Applied Thermal Engineering, pages 54–60.

Wu, W., Wang, S., Wu, W., Chen, K., Hong, S., and Lai,

Y. (2019). A critical review of battery thermal perfor-

mance and liquid based battery thermal management.

Energy conversion and management, 182:262–281.

Xie, J., Ge, Z., Zang, M., and Wang, S. (2017). Structural

optimization of lithium-ion battery pack with forced

air cooling system. Applied Thermal Engineering,

126.

Xu, M., Zhang, Z., Wang, X., Jia, L., and Yang, L. (2015).

A pseudo three-dimensional electrochemical–thermal

model of a prismatic lifepo4 battery during discharge

process. Energy, 80:303–317.

Yang, N., Zhang, X., Li, G., and Hua, D. (2015). Assess-

ment of the forced air-cooling performance for cylin-

drical lithium-ion battery packs: A comparative anal-

ysis between aligned and staggered cell arrangements.

Applied Thermal Engineering, 80:55–65.

Zhang, T., Gao, Q., Wang, G., Gu, Y., Wang, Y., Bao, W.,

and Zhang, D. (2017). Investigation on the promo-

tion of temperature uniformity for the designed bat-

tery pack with liquid ﬂow in cooling process. Applied

Thermal Engineering, 116(Complete):655–662.

Zolot, M., Pesaran, A. A., and Mihalic, M. (2002). Ther-

mal evaluation of toyota prius battery pack. Technical

report, SAE Technical paper.

Zolot, M. D., Kelly, K., Keyser, M., Mihalic, M., Pesaran,

A., and Hieronymus, A. (2001). Thermal evaluation

of the honda insight battery pack. Technical report,

National Renewable Energy Lab., Golden, CO (US).

VEHITS 2022 - 8th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems