4.6 Article

The Cell Cooling Coefficient: A Standard to Define Heat Rejection from Lithium-Ion Batteries

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ELECTROCHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 166, 期 12, 页码 A2383-A2395

出版社

ELECTROCHEMICAL SOC INC
DOI: 10.1149/2.0191912jes

关键词

-

资金

  1. Faraday Institution [EP/S003053/1, FIRG003]
  2. Innovate UK THT project [133377]
  3. Innovate UK BATMAN project [104180]
  4. Innovate UK CoRuBa project [133369]
  5. EPSRC TRENDS project [EP/R020973/1]
  6. EPSRC [EP/R020973/1, EP/S003053/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Innovate UK [133377, 104180, 133369] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lithium-ion battery development is conventionally driven by energy and power density targets, yet the performance of a lithium-ion battery pack is often restricted by its heat rejection capabilities. It is therefore common to observe elevated cell temperatures and large internal thermal gradients which, given that impedance is a function of temperature, induce large current inhomogeneities and accelerate cell-level degradation. Battery thermal performance must be better quantified to resolve this limitation, but anisotropic thermal conductivity and uneven internal heat generation rates render conventional heat rejection measures, such as the Biot number, unsuitable. The Cell Cooling Coefficient (CCC) is introduced as a new metric which quantifies the rate of heat rejection. The CCC (units W.K-1) is constant for a given cell and thermal management method and is therefore ideal for comparing the thermal performance of different cell designs and form factors. By enhancing knowledge of pack-wide heat rejection, uptake of the CCC will also reduce the risk of thermal runaway. The CCC is presented as an essential tool to inform the cell down-selection process in the initial design phases, based solely on their thermal bottlenecks. This simple methodology has the potential to revolutionise the lithium-ion battery industry. (C) The Author(s) 2019. Published by ECS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据