Original Article

Proc IMechE Part D:

J Automobile Engineering
1–12
A thermal management system for the Ó IMechE 2015
Reprints and permissions:
battery pack of a hybrid electric sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0954407015582323

vehicle: modeling and control pid.sagepub.com

Xinran (William) Tao and John Wagner

Abstract
The lithium-ion battery pack in hybrid electric vehicles is an important energy storage device that requires proper ther-
mal management. A considerable amount of heat is generated by the battery cells owing to their internal resistance dur-
ing charging and discharging, especially for peak vehicle loads. This study focuses on developing a smart controlled
thermal management solution in which a vapor compression system is integrated. A lumped-parameter cylindrical bat-
tery thermal model is developed with a Kalman observer to estimate the transient changes in the temperatures of the
battery surface, the battery core, and the cooling air flowing around the cells. For the first time, the optimal cooling air
temperature of the battery is investigated using optimal control theory. A model predictive controller is then introduced
to regulate the refrigerant compressor and to track the ideal cooling air temperature. In a case study, the power con-
sumption of the thermal management system and the behavior of the internal temperature of the battery are investi-
gated under an urban assault cycle. For various operation configurations and conditions, the numerical results
demonstrate that the peak error of the core temperature of the battery can be tracked within 0.25 °C of the target
value and the energy consumption of the cooling system can be reduced by up to 58%.

Keywords
Hybrid electric vehicle, battery pack, thermal management, modeling, nonlinear control

Date received: 18 September 2014; accepted: 17 February 2015

Introduction To realize higher HEV mileage and power output

Battery performance is of great importance in electric
vehicle (EV) and hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) opera-
tion. Battery cells generate a large amount of heat dur-
ing charging and discharging, mainly because of the
internal resistance. This heat generation leads to a tem-
perature rise inside the battery pack. The thermal beha-
vior of batteries influences their chemistry and electrical
reactions. In general, the battery capacity will be
reduced if the temperature regularly exceeds the normal
operating range. Consequently, batteries must be con-
trolled within a certain desired working temperature
level to ensure a stable performance and a long life.
Much attention is now being focused on developing
reliable thermal management systems for the battery
pack in ground vehicles.
A lithium-ion battery with generally a higher heat
generation rate for a given volume is considered the
most attractive electrical energy storage solution
because it has a higher power density than either a
lead–acid battery or a nickel–metal hydride battery.1
requirements, various topics on the design of a thermal
management system for a lithium-ion battery have been
studied. A large amount of research work has been
completed on battery modeling for EVs.2,3 Peck et al.4
developed a battery model to estimate the current den-
sity, the voltage distribution, and the local heating on
the electrodes. Gross and Clark5 introduced a battery-
life-ageing model and applied it to real-world environ-
mental conditions, which permitted optimization of the
thermal management strategies for a battery. Sun et al.6
discussed the effect of different cooling structures on
the heat rejection from battery packs. Teng7 and Teng
and Yeow8 developed a series of thermal models for a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson,
South Carolina, USA
Corresponding author:
John Wagner, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson
University, 102 Fluor Daniel Building, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.
Email: jwagner@clemson.edu

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
2 Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering
Figure 1. Structure of the BTMS.
A/C: air conditioning.
battery using a finite element analysis approach.
Finally, a systematic approach for thermal management
of a lithium-ion battery was proposed by Jayaraman
et al.9
This work investigates a computer-controlled bat-
tery thermal management system (BTMS) to stabilize
the internal temperature of battery cells using tracking
of a prescribed cooling air temperature by applying a
vapor compression system for air conditioning (AC). A
cylindrical battery cell applied in the standard commer-
cial A123 system10 was chosen as the object of this
study. The AC system is modeled in AMESim. An
electric–thermal model of a battery is created to esti-
mate the transient changes in the temperature of the
battery surface, the battery core, and the coolant flow-
ing through the battery bank. The battery model also
simulates the electrical output voltage and the state of
charge (SOC). The model-based battery cooling con-
troller was designed to determine the optimal cooling
air temperature at the inlet. Next, a model predictive
controller is applied to the AC condition system to
track the desired cooling air temperature as determined
by the battery cooling controller. The structure of the
overall thermal management system is shown in
Figure 1. This paper also investigates how different
cooling structures affect the tracking of the cooling air
temperature and their influences on the efficiency of
heat removal to provide insights into the design of the
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
thermal management of a battery and its manufactur-
ing process.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows.
In the second section, an AHR32113 cylindrical battery
cell model is mathematically described. The procedures
to calculate the ideal cooling air temperature using a
Kalman filter and a linear optimal controller are out-
lined in the third section. The fourth section introduces
a model predictive controller designed to regulate the
speed of the refrigerant compressor in the AC system
and to provide the ideal cooling air temperature. The
fifth section presents the numerical results for the per-
formance of the BTMS. The simulation results demon-
strate that the proposed control method works as
expected and stabilizes the battery temperature around
the target value with a small error. The sixth section
concludes the paper. Appendix 1 contains a complete
list of the notation.
Battery pack model
In this study, the selected battery pack has a nominal
power rating of 110 kW and is powered by 240
AHR32113 cells. The batteries are evenly distributed in
12 modules with 20 cells each. The battery layout in
every module is uniform: 10 columns and two rows.
Three modules (six rows of battery cells in total) are
cooled in the same air stream, as shown in Figure 1. To
Tao and Wagner 3

Figure 2. Structure of the Battery cell model structure (BTMS).

SOC0: initial state of charge; SOC: state of charge.

identify the ideal temperature Tair, in of the cooling air
at the inlet and the air mass flow rate m_ air necessary to
remove the heat load, the battery pack model considers
three factors: the electrical dynamics, the SOC, and the
thermal behavior, as shown in Figure 2.
The battery’s electrical behavior is represented by
the Randles model11 corresponding to a simplified cir-
cuit. The model describes the battery with an ideal
power source, an internal resistance, and an RC net-
work. The electric dynamic equation can be expressed
as
Vo = Eo  Re I  Vc ð1Þ
battery core and the difference between the charge and
the discharge phases. The SOC estimator output
includes the open source voltage, the SOC, and the
internal resistances Ro and Rc. A detailed online SOC
estimation method using a Kalman filter was intro-
duced by Domenico et al.,12 but the power distribution
optimization is not the main topic of interest. In this
work, the SOC calculation is simplified to a Coulomb
counting method, as given by
ðt
1
SOC = SOC0  I(t) dt
CAh
t0

where where SOC0 is the initial battery SOC and CAh is the
dVc Vc battery’s nominal capacity.
I=C + The thermal submodel of the battery is derived on
dt Ro
the basis of a two-state (the surface temperature Ts and
Equation (1) can be rewritten as the core temperature Tc) thermal model of a cylindrical
battery introduced by Forgez et al.13 (see Figure 2) with
Re I = E0  Vo  Vc the dynamics
so that the above relationships become
dTc Ts  Tc
  Cc = Qb + ð3Þ
dVc Re dt Rc
Re C = E0  Vo  Vc 1 + ð2Þ
dt Ro dTs Tf  Ts Ts  Tc
Cs =  ð4Þ
dt Ru Rc
where Vc is the voltage applied on the capacitor and Vo
is the output voltage of the battery. The load current I The parameters Cc and Cs are the heat capacity of
is an input to the electric submodel of the battery. the battery core and the heat capacity of the battery
The values of Re and Rc in the electric model are surface respectively. The thermal resistance Rc between
dependent on the SOC, the temperature Tc of the the battery core and the battery surface was assumed to

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
4 Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering

be a constant value (see assumption (A4) later), and the

thermal resistance Ru between the battery surface and
the cooling air is decided by the convective heat transfer
coefficient h on the battery surface and the convective
transfer area. Lin et al.14 proposed a parameterization
method to estimate Cc, Cs, Rc, and Re. The heat genera-
tion rate Qb is approximately equal to the concentrated
Joule loss according to

Qb = I2 Re + I2Ro Ro ð5Þ

The relationship between the cooling air flow rate

requirement and the heat generation rate in the battery
pack was established by Damodaran et al.15 The cool- Figure 3. Battery configurations in the three modules (top
ing air flow rate is determined to maintain a uniform view).
temperature distribution across the battery bank and
effectively to expel the heat. The change in the air tem-
perature should be controlled to be less than 5 °C. The
Table 1. AHR32113 module and model parameters.
convective heat transfer coefficient h of the battery sur-
face varies with the cooling air mass flow rate, and the Parameter Value Units
average convective heat transfer coefficient for the
entire battery bundle is derived from the average Cooling area of the cell 0.011 36 m2
Diameter of the cell 32 mm
Nusselt number NuD for air flow across the tube bun-
Height of the cell 110 mm
dles composed of 10 rows according to Capacity of the cell 4.5–4.3 Ah
 1=4 Energy content 14.6 Wh
Pr Discharge power 550 W
NuD = 0:262 Rem
Dmax Pr
c
ð6Þ Voltage 3.3 V
Prs
Operating temperature –30 to 55 °C
where c and m are factors determined by the distance Storage temperature –40 to 60 °C
between each cell, the number of battery rows and A 0.011 36 m2
Across 0.0455 m2
ReDmax , which is given by C 0.36 —
Cc 268 J/K
rVmax D Cf 0.708 J/K
ReDmax = ð7Þ
m Cs 18.8 J/K
k 0.0258 W/m K
When ReDmax . 2000, as it is in this case, the heat trans- m 0.63 —
fer coefficient h is given by m_ air 0.18 kg/s
Pr 0.71 —
k Rc 1.0 K/W
h = NuD ð8Þ SL 35 mm
D
ST 35 mm
The configuration parameters of the battery cells r 1.16 kg/m3
inside the module can be described by the battery dis- m 1.846 3 1025 N s/m2
tances SL and ST, as shown in Figure 3, which is a top
view of three aligned battery modules.
The variable Vmax in equation (7) denotes the maxi-
h = 617:04m_ 0:6
air ð10Þ
mum air flow velocity inside the battery pack. Since the
batteries are placed in lines, the maximum flow velocity Using the convective heat transfer coefficient, the
can be calculated as differential equation describing the transient changes in
m_ air ST the flows of the cooling air temperature across the bat-
Vmax = ð9Þ tery bank is written as
rAcross ST  D
The density r of air, the dynamic viscosity m, and the dTair, k Ts  Tair, k
Cf = + m_ air cp ðTair, k1  Tair, k Þ
thermal conductivity k of air are considered constant. dt Ru
The values of Across, D, SL, and ST are also ð11Þ
fixed. Substituting the thermal characteristics of air in
Table 1 (given later) into equations (6) to (9) allows the where Ru = 1=hA is the thermal resistance at the bat-
estimated relationship between the cooling air mass tery surface and A is the cooling surface area of the
flow rate and the convective heat transfer coefficient of battery. The parameter Cf is the heat capacity of the air
the battery surface to be expressed in the simplified surrounding one battery column, cp is the specific heat
form of air under atmospheric pressure, and the subscript k

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
Tao and Wagner 5

is the column index. A larger k means that the column The problem of the temperature stabilization of the
is positioned further away from the air inlet port. The battery core can be solved by using linear optimal con-
cooling air temperature Tair, k denotes the air tempera- trol theory. This system can be shown to be both obser-
ture at the kth column’s outlet position. This thermal vable and controllable. From a controller design
model of cooling air reflects its temperature change at standpoint, the heat generation of the battery is not a
different battery columns and estimates the resulting controllable input but rather is considered to be a dis-
uneven temperature distribution inside the battery turbance as it is not determined by the cooling system.
bank. To find the optimal cooling air temperature Tair,r at the
inlet required to remove the generated heat, the tem-
perature of the battery core must be estimated.
Optimal controller and Kalman filter for An observer is required to correct the temperature of
the temperature of the battery core the battery core. The observer is built using Kalman fil-
Traditional BTMS designs often consider the mass flow ter theory, to estimate the unmeasured temperature
rate of the cooling air but do not select the temperature states, based on the measured states Ts and Tair. Several
of the cooling air as a control variable. A constant air assumptions are applied in the observer design process
temperature at the inlet may not achieve the target tem- as follows.
perature stabilization of the battery core regardless of
the applied mass flow rate of the cooling air, especially A1. Battery cells located in same column share a uni-
when the heat generation rate exceeds a critical value form cooling condition.
(for instance, if Qb . (Tc,target– Tair) / Rc, the target A2. Only the temperature Ts of the battery surface
temperature will not be reached).16 This section will and the temperature Tair of the cooling air can be
introduce an observer to estimate the temperature of measured with sensors.
the battery core, and an optimal controller to calculate A3. There is a constant and uniform flow rate m_ air of
the ideal cooling air temperature at the inlet. the cooling fluid (air) (i.e. a constant thermal
The lumped-parameter thermal model for the cylind- resistance Ru at the battery surface) across all
rical battery and cooling system establish a basis for the batteries.
controller design. Given a constant mass flow rate of A4. The inner thermal resistance Rc of the battery is
the cooling air, the heat transfer coefficient of the cool- constant.
ing surface is time invariant too. Considering the bat-
tery heat Qb generated in equation (3) and the cooling The observer is constructed in the form
air temperature Tair, 0 at the inlet in equation (11) as
the system inputs, the thermal model of the battery cell x^_ = A^
x + Bu + Lðy  C^
xÞ ð13aÞ
in first column can be expressed in a linear state-space y = C^
x ð13bÞ
form as
where A, B, and C are the system matrices defined in
2 3 2 1 1
0
32 3 equation (12) The feedback gain matrix L, which is
T_ c Rc Cc Rc Cc Tc
6 _ 7 6 1 1
+ R1 1 76
74 Ts 7 given by
4 Ts 5 = 6 4 Rc Cs Rc Cs u Cs Ru Cs 5 5
_ m_ air Cf 1  1
Tair 0 1 Tair L = QCT wwT ð14Þ
Ru Cf Cf Ru
21 3
0  
6 c
C
7 Qb is designed to minimize the cost function that may be
+4 0 0 5 ð12aÞ defined as
Tair, 0
0 m_ air Cf
ðt1
The temperature Ts of the battery surface and the eT (t)We(t) dt
temperature Tair of the cooling air can be directly mea- t0
sured, but the temperature Tc of the battery core cannot
be measured by sensors. The error in the estimation of where e = x  x^ and W is the weighting matrix. The
the temperature of the battery core exists because of mean measurement error vector may be defined as
uncertainties in the heat generation calculation and the w = ½w1 ; w2 , where w1 is the mean error magnitude of
lack of feedback about the core temperature. The model the sensors for measuring the temperature of the bat-
output is defined as tery surface and w2 is the mean error magnitude of the
  sensors for measuring the temperature of the cooling
Ts air. In equation (14), Q is obtained by finding the non-
y^ =
Tair negative definite symmetric solution of the correspond-
2 3 ing algebraic Riccati equation, and the gain matrices L
  Tc ð12bÞ
0 1 0 6 7 can be solved offline, given that the system matrices
= 4 s 5
T
0 0 1 and the magnitude of the measurement noise vector are
Tair time invariant.

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
6 Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering
With the corrected estimation of the temperature of
the battery core, the optimal temperature Tair, r of the
cooling air at the inlet can be determined by applying
the optimal controller design technique. The control
law is designed to minimize the selected function
ðt1 n o MPC treats the conditions for the air-temperature-
½xr (t)  x(t)T R1 ½xr (t)  x(t) + u~T R2 u~ dt
t0
where R1 and R2 are positive symmetric weighting
matrices. In this study,
R1 = ½ 1 0 0; 0 0 0; 0 0 0
and
R2 = ½ 1 0 ; 0:001 0 
were selected to stabilize the temperature T^c of the bat-
tery core to its reference value Tc,r. The variable
u~ = ½Qb , Tair, r  u0 T is the input magnitude vector
from equation (12a). The first element is the heat gener-
ation rate, and the second element is the range of the
target cooling air temperature at the inlet.
The optimal control law is obtained by solving the
feedback and feedforward gain matrices with the set
point Tc,r. The linear optimal controller is constructed as
h i1
1
H1
c = R1 ð A  BF0 Þ B
F0 = R1 T
2 B P
u0 = H1
c xr
u =  F0 x + u0
in which P is solved as the nonnegative definite solu-
tion of the corresponding algebraic Riccati equation.
The term R2 is an adjusting parameter. The controller
obtains the ideal cooling air temperature Tair, r at the
inlet as the second element in the optimal input
Tair, r = u(2)
The ideal cooling air temperature at the inlet to mini-
mize the cost function in equation (15) is identified in
equation (17).
Model predictive controller for the AC
system
In this section, a controller will be constructed to track
the ideal cooling air temperature by regulating the speed
of the AC refrigerant compressor using model predictive
control (MPC) theory. The AC system typically consists
of a compressor, a condenser, an expansion valve, an
evaporator, and an accumulator. These components are
connected by a set of tubes and pipes. A large dynamic
modeling challenge lies in accurately addressing the
phase change (liquid, two phase or superheated vapor)
of the refrigerant. In previous work,17–20 a moving-
boundary method was introduced to model a transient
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
heat exchanger with a large set of states. However,
highly nonlinear models are too sophisticated for real-
time controller design. In this study, a model predictive
controller based on a step-response model is utilized to
regulate the cooling air temperature of the battery at the
battery pack’s air inlet.
ð15Þ tracking problem as an infinite-horizon optimal control
strategy design with a quadratic performance criter-
ion.21 The controller design procedure includes refer-
ence specification, output prediction, control action
sequence computation, and error feedback. The system
uses the ideal cooling air temperature Tair, r as the refer-
ence. With application of a reduced-order step-response
model, the controller is built in the following steps.
First, apply a step signal to the compressor speed, from
100 r/min to 1000 r/min at t = t0. Then, record the con-
ditioned air temperature at the output every 1 s to gen-
erate the model array Astep = [a1, a2, a3, ., a70]. The
total sample time is chosen as 70 s (70 elements in the
model array), which is sufficient for the system to reach
a steady state. The element ai denotes the conditioned
air temperature at the ith second after the step input
change was applied. The sampling time constant is 1 s,
which is sufficiently small to describe accurately the
transient responses of the system.
Define u(i) as the normalized compressor speed at the
ith time instant so that the actual speed of the compres-
sor may be obtained as
ð16Þ
v(i) = b1 u(i) + b2 ð18Þ
The change in the compressor speed at the ith instant
becomes
Dv(i) = (u(i)  u(i1) )b1 ð19Þ
where b1 and b2 are constant controller parameters,
which correspond to the step input of the compressor
speed. With the normalized input u(i), define the past
ð17Þ input array as
 T
U(i1) = u(i70) , u(i69) , u(i68) , :::, u(i1) ð20Þ
The prediction horizon is an adjustment parameter.
In this case, a 5 s prediction is applied considering both
the tracking accuracy and the computation cost. The
input change in the future 5 s may be constructed as
Du(i) = u(i)  u(i1)
 T ð21Þ
DU(i) = Du(i) , Du(i + 1) , :::, Du(i + 4)
Applying the convolution theorem,21 the predicted con-
ditioned air temperature vector at the (i + 1)th instant
after a change in the pump speed would be
T^air(i + 1) = Tss H  S(i) DU(i)  S0 U(i1) ð22Þ
where H 2 R531 is a vector for which all elements are 1.
To maintain the positive relationship between the input
Tao and Wagner 7

and the output, it is convenient to define a new array

S as
2 3
s1 0 0 0 0
6 s2 s1 0 0 07
6 7
S=6 6 s3 s2 s1 0 07 7 ð23Þ
4 s4 s3 s2 s1 05
s5 s4 s3 s2 s1
the elements si of which are given by si = Tss–ai. The
variable Tss is the steady-state output air temperature
at a pump speed of 100 r/min. Also, S0 is given by
Figure 4. Simulated conditioned air temperatures in the step-
2 3
s70  s69 : s4  s3 s3  s2 s2 response model and AMESim.
6 0 s70  s69 : s4  s3 s3 7 C: °C.
6 7
S0 = 66 0 0 s 70  s 69 : s4 7
7
4 0 0 0 : s5 5 y(i) = Tair, out  Tair(i) . The corrected prediction of the
0 0 : s7  s6 s6 step response becomes
ð24Þ  
Y~(i + 1) = S DU(i) + Y^0(i + 1) + H y(i)  y^(i) ð28Þ
S and S0 are both the system matrices of the step-
where Y~ 2 R531 , U(i1) 2 R7031 , S 2 R535 , and
response sample model.
S0 2 R5370 .
To implement a recirculation configuration for the
Figure 4 shows a comparison of the simulated condi-
cooling air flow, equation (22) needs to be modified for
tioned air temperatures generated by the step-response
the model predictive controller. The reference output of
model and the AMESim simulations for the same com-
the model predictive controller should now be the dif-
pressor speed profile. It can be observed that the step
ference between the target cooling air temperature and
response agrees favorably with AMESim. Thus, the
the air temperature Tair, out at the battery pack’s outlet
step-response model can be applied in the model predic-
rather than the constant value of the ambient air tem-
tive controller design.
perature. The predicted cooling air temperature vector
The controller calculates the derivatives of the com-
becomes
pressor speed for the future time instants as an input
T^air(i + 1) = Tair, out H  S(i) DU(i)  S0 U(i1) ð25Þ vector according to
 T
In this study, a 5 s predictive horizon control is suffi- DU(i) = Du(i) , Du(i + 1) , :::, Du(i + 4) ð29Þ
ciently robust to offer an accurate tracking performance
of the cooling air temperature. Let the prediction vector The optimized DU is calculated to minimize the
be expressed as selected quadratic performance criterion of the error
 T between the predicted system output and the desired
Y^(i + 1) = y^(i + 1) , y^(i + 2) , :::, y^(i + 5) output over the prediction horizon. The selected quad-
h iT ð26Þ ratic performance cost function J may be stated as
Y^0(i + 1) = y0(i + 1) , y0(i + 2) , :::, y0(i + 5)
 T  
J(i) = Yr  Y~(i + 1) M1 Yr  Y~(i + 1) + DU(i) M2 DU(i)
where y^(i) is the prediction of the conditioned air tem-
perature which decreased in the evaporator. The ð30Þ
elementy0(i) is the prediction of the conditioned air tem- where M1 and M2 are the weighting matrices and
perature which decreased at the ith time instant if the Yr = ½yr(i + 1) , yr(i + 2) , :::, yr(i + 5) T is the reference trajec-
compressor speed maintains the current value. The pre- tory matrices obtained from the ideal cooling air signal
diction of the conditioned air temperature at the output sent from the battery cooling controller. The variable
under a varying input is obtained by substituting the Yr may be obtained from equation (17) so that
future change in the inputs defined in equation (21) in
the step-response model so that yr(i) = Tair , out(i  5)  Tair, r(i5) ð31Þ

Y^(i + 1) = S DU(i) + Y^0(i + 1) To minimize

 the quadratic performance function J(i),
ð27Þ set ∂J(i) ∂ DU(i) . The control law can be derived on
Y^0(i + 1) = S0 U(i1)
the basis of equations (28) to (30) so that
Feedback updates are implemented to correct the
predicted output due to inaccurate predictions. E0(i + 1) = Yr(i)  S0 U(i1)
Applying the latest measurement of the conditioned air  1
Ke = ST M1 S + M2 ST M1 ð32Þ
temperature Tair(i) at the evaporator outlet. The mea-
sured output is the decreasing air temperature: DU(i) = Ke E0(i + 1)

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
8 Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering

Given that the mass flow rate of the cooling air and
position of the refrigerant valve are fixed in this con-
text, the system is of a single-input single-output type.
The error feedback gain Ke can be evaluated offline,
which is favorable for real-time control. Figure 4 shows
that the conditioned air temperature simulated by the
step-response model agrees with the results from the
AMESim model very well.
Case study: thermal management of the
battery
To evaluate the design of the controller for the thermal
management system, the electric current profile for an
urban assault cycle (Figure 5) is considered in the case
study. The variables of interest include the temperature
Tc of the battery core and the energy consumption
Ecomp of the cooling system’s compressor. The power
consumption of the evaporator fan is not discussed
since a constant cooling air mass flow rate was
imposed. The AHR32113 battery pack and the mathe-
matical model parameters for this case study are listed
in Table 1.
Eight tests will be conducted with two different sur-
rounding temperatures, two air circulation configura-
tions, and two different control strategies, as listed in
Table 2. The reference temperature Tc, r of the battery
Figure 5. Battery current profile versus time for the urban
assault cycle.
core is 30 °C for all tests. The control strategies are the
optimal MPC and the traditional on–off control. The
air circulation structures include a single path and recir-
culation. In the former, cooling air is sourced from the
surroundings; thus, the air temperature at the evapora-
tor inlet is the same as the ambient temperature. The
cooling air is then completely exhausted to the ambient
from the battery pack once the heat removal process in
the cell has occurred. The latter approach recirculates
the cooling air from the outlet of the battery pack back
into the evaporator, which is expected to reduce the
energy consumption and to increase the efficiency22 in
comparison with the first design, especially for high
ambient temperatures.
In the study, two sets of battery pack models are
integrated into the system. The plant model is created
with both an electric submodel and a thermal model for
heat generation input. The controller model is designed
with the Kalman observer using the cooling air tem-
perature and the feedback on the surface temperature
of the battery from the plant model sensors. The overall
controller structure for the battery cooling system is
shown in Figure 6.
For test 1, the optimal controller and the model pre-
dictive controller are applied. The cooling air is drawn
directly from the surroundings and then exhausted to
the ambient environment from the outlet of the battery
pack, using the single-path configuration. The initial
temperature of the battery core is set at 30 °C in the
plant model while the initial temperature of the battery
core in the controller model is set at 35 °C. Figure 7
shows the observer performance, in which the dot-
dashed curve denotes the estimated temperature of the
battery core in the controller model and the solid curve
denotes the simulated temperature of the battery core
from the plant model. These graphical results indicate
that the errors in the estimated and measured tempera-
tures of the battery core converge to zero within 30 s.
Figure 8 displays the reference ideal cooling air tem-
perature Tair,r at the inlet calculated by the optimal
controller. The model predictive controller regulates
the compressor speed in the vapor compression system

Table 2. Scenarios for tests 1 to 6 in the numerical study.

Test Tamb (°C) Configuration for Control strategy Tracking error Tracking error of Heat Energy
cooling air of the cooling air the battery core removed consumption
circulation temperature temperature Qdis (kJ) of the compressor
jTair–Tair, rj (°C) jTc–Tc, rj (°C) Ecomp (kJ)

1 30 Single path Optimal–MPC 1.71 0.24 1068 526

2 30 Single path On–off N/A 0.61 1079 801
3 30 Recirculated Optimal–MPC 1.83 0.25 1070 224
4 30 Recirculated On–off N/A 0.57 1126 542
5 40 Single path Optimal–MPC 15.83 . 5.6 1808 5517
6 40 Single path On–off N/A . 5.6 1813 5577
7 40 Recirculated Optimal–MPC 1.56 0.22 1959 1439
8 40 Recirculated On–off N/A 0.38 2091 1848

MPC: model predictive control; N/A: not applicable.

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
Tao and Wagner
Figure 6. Structure of the thermal management controller for the battery.
AC: air-conditioning; MPC: model predictive control.
Figure 7. Estimated and actual temperatures of the battery
core with the optimal observer for test 1.
C: °C.
Figure 8. MPC tracking performance (open circles) for the
optimal control reference signal (dot-dashed curve) of the
cooling air temperature for test 1.
C: °C.
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
9
to adjust the cooling air temperature Tair at the eva-
porator outlet. The measured cooling air temperature
tracks the reference trajectory with an average error of
1.71 °C.
The corresponding temperatures of the battery pack
and the cooling air are displayed in Figure 9. The tem-
perature of the battery core is maintained in a small
neighborhood of the reference value with an average
error of 0.24 °C. If needed, the error can be further
reduced by adjusting the weighting matrix R2 in the
cost function and the matrix M2 in the quadratic per-
formance index according to equations (15) and (30).
However, in practice, a decrease in the weighting matrix
R2 may cause the ideal cooling air temperature to
exceed the normal output range, which will require
great speed changes in the refrigerant pump operation.
As expected, the temperature of the battery surface is
cooler than that of the battery core, and the cooling air
temperature generally follows the surface temperature
owing to convective heat transfer effects.
The single-path cooling air flow configuration can
typically remove heat at a higher rate than the heat gen-
erated by the battery cells. The cooling air at the bat-
tery pack’s outlet is generally only increased by 3–6 °C
and is still cooler than the surrounding temperature. By
recycling the cooling air from the battery pack’s outlet
back to the evaporator, the heat load in the evaporator
will be reduced. In test 3, the recirculated cooling air
flow structure with the modified model predictive con-
troller provides good cooling air and tracking of the
temperature of the battery core according to Table 2.
10
Figure 9. Simulated temperatures of the battery core and
surface together with the cooling air temperature for test 1.
C: °C.
Figure 10. MPC tracking performance (open circles) for the
optimal control reference signal (dot-dashed curve) of the
cooling air temperature for test 7.
C: °C.
However, the energy consumption of the compressor in
the 1200 s simulation is significantly reduced by 58%
when compared with test 1.
In tests 5 to 8, the surrounding temperature is set at
40 °C. Test 5 uses the single-path cooling air configura-
tion. When the ambient temperature is higher than the
desired temperature of the battery core, the reference
cooling air temperature is very difficult to achieve with
this air flow structure. Even with the maximum com-
pressor speed, the cooling air temperature is still higher
than the reference value. Consequently, the battery core
was not driven to the reference temperature within the
simulation time, and the total energy cost of the com-
pressor is as high as Ecomp = 5517 kJ.
For test 7, the recirculated cooling air flow reduces
the heat load so that the cooling system can successfully
track the temperature of the battery core. The ideal
cooling air temperature Tair,r calculated by the optimal
controller is displayed in Figure 10 with the actual cool-
ing air temperature as tracked by the model predictive
controller. The average error in the cooling temperature
is 1.56 °C with a compressor energy usage of 1439 kJ, as
in Table 2. Figure 11 displays the simulation results of
test 7. The temperature of the battery core is cooled to
30 °C from the initial surrounding temperature within a
relatively short time and was maintained at this
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering
Figure 11. Simulated temperatures of the battery core and
surface together with the cooling air temperature for test 7.
C: °C.
temperature with an average error of 0.25 °C. The
results indicate that the proposed MPC method using a
step-response model can satisfactorily track the desired
cooling air temperature, although the vapor compres-
sion system is highly nonlinear.
To investigate the advantage of the optimal control
strategy in power conservation, tests 2, 4, 6, and 8 were
conducted with a conventional switched on–off control
strategy. In these four tests, the compressor operates
with its maximum speed when the temperature of the
battery core reaches 30.5 °C. When the battery core is
cooled to 29 °C, the compressor speed is reduced to
150 r/min to avoid potential local hot spots. In test 2
(single path), the compressor energy consumption is
801 kJ, which is higher than that in test 1. The compres-
sor’s energy consumption in test 4 (recirculation path)
is 542 kJ, and it is 1.4 times higher than that in test 3.
For test 6, the simulation results are similar to those
for test 5 with the compressor operating at the maxi-
mum speed during the whole simulation owing to the
single-path cooling air configuration. With the recircu-
lation cooling air configuration, the proposed optimal–
MPC strategy provides the advantages of a 23–58%
power conservation in comparison with the conven-
tional on–off strategy.
Conclusion
A thermal management control system for the battery
of an HEV using a model predictive controller was pro-
posed. The AC system is integrated into the BTMS to
remove effectively the heat generated by the battery
cells during high load charging–discharging operations.
A traditional battery cooling system controls only the
flow rate rather than the temperature of the coolant,
which limits the heat removal rate. This study investi-
gated the cooling air temperature control problem for
the first time. The proposed BTMS applies a Kalman
filter to correct the estimation of the immeasurable
temperature of the battery core and calculates the ideal
cooling air temperature by optimal control theory. The
identified ideal cooling air temperature is sent to the
AC control system as a reference input signal. MPC
theory is then applied to regulate the speed of the AC
Tao and Wagner
refrigerant compressor. The simulation results demon-
strate that the model predictive controller is able to
handle the conditioned air temperature tracking with a
small error and delay. The core temperature of the bat-
teries can be stabilized around the target for various
cooling conditions while minimizing the power
consumption.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the technical support
of the US Army Tank Automotive Research
Development and Engineering Center, and the
Automotive Research Center at the University of
Michigan and Clemson University.
Declaration of conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Funding
This work was supported by the US Army Tank
Automotive Research Development and Engineering
Center (grant number: W56HZ-14-2-001), and the
Automotive Research Center at the University of
Michigan and Clemson University (grant number:
3003058759).
References
1. B. G. Pollet, I.Staffell and J. Shang, Current status of
hybrid, battery and fuel cell electric vehicles: From elec-
trochemistry to market prospects. Electrochimica Acta
2012; 84(1): 235–249.
2. Fang W, Kwon O and Wang C. Electrochemical thermal
modeling of automotive Li-ion batteries and experimen-
tal validation using a three electrode cell. Int J Energy
Res 2010; 34(2): 107–115.
3. Hu Y, Yurkovich S, Guezennec Y and Yurkovich BJ.
Electro-thermal battery model identification for automo-
tive applications. J Power Sources 2011; 196(1): 449–457.
4. Peck S, Olszanski T, Zanardelli S and Pierce M. Valida-
tion of a thermal–electric Li-ion battery model. SAE
paper 2012-01-0332, 2012.
5. Gross O and Clark S. Optimizing electric vehicle battery
life through battery thermal management. SAE paper
2011-01-1370,l 2011.
6. Sun H, Tossan B and Brouns D. Thermal behavior study
on HEV air-cooled battery pack. SAE paper 2011-01-
1368, 2011.
7. Teng H. Thermal analysis of a high-power lithium-ion
battery system with indirect air cooling. SAE paper 2012-
01-0333, 2012.
8. Teng H and Yeow K. Design of direct and indirect liquid
cooling systems for high capacity, high-power lithium-
ion battery packs. SAE paper 2012-01-2017, 2012.
9. Jayaraman S, Anderson G, Kaushik S and Klaus P.
Modeling of battery pack thermal system for a plug-in
hybrid electric vehicle. SAE paper 2011-01-0666, 2011.
10. Warner J. Lithium-ion battery packs for EVs. In: Pistoia
G (ed) Lithium-ion batteries: advances and applications.
1st edition. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2014, ch 7, pp. 127–150.
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015
11
11. Guzzela L and Sciarretta A. Vehicle propulsion systems.
2nd edition. New York: Springer, 2007, ch 4, pp.
105–119.
12. Di Domenico D, Fiengo G and Stefanopoulou A.
Lithium-ion battery state of charge estimation with a
Kalman filter based on a electrochemical model. In:
IEEE international conference on control applications, San
Antonio, Texas, USA, 3–5 September 2008, pp. 702–707.
New York: IEEE.
13. Forgez C, Do DV, Friedrich G et al. Thermal modeling
of a cylindrical LiFePO4/graphite lithium-ion battery. J
Power Sources 2010; 195: 2961–2968.
14. Lin X, Fu H, Perez H et al. Parameterization and obser-
vability analysis of scalable battery clusters for onboard
thermal management. Oil Gas Sci Technol – Rev. IFP
Energies Nouv 2013; 68(1): 165–178.
15. Damodaran V, Murugan S, Shigarkanthi V and Nagtilak
S. Thermal management of lead acid battery (Pb–A) in
electric vehicle. SAE paper 2011-01-0653, 2011.
16. Teng H and Yue M. An analysis of a lithium ion battery
system with indirect air cooling and warm up. SAE paper
2011-01-2249, 2011.
17. McKinley T and Alleyne A. An advanced nonlinear
switched heat exchanger model for vapor compression
cycles using the moving boundary method. Int J Refrig
2008: 31(7): 1253–1264.
18. Li B, Peuker S, Hrnjak P and Alleyne A. Evaluation of
transient refrigerant migration modeling approach on
automotive air conditioning systems. SAE paper 2011-
01-0649, 2011.
19. Li B and Alleyne A. A dynamic model of a vapor com-
pression cycle with shut-down and start-up operations.
Int J Refrig 2010; 33(3): 538–552.
20. Li B, Peuker S, Hrnjak P and Alleyne A. Evaluation of
transient refrigerant migration modeling approach on
automotive air conditioning systems. SAE paper 2011-
01-0649, 2011.
21. Rawlings J. Tutorial: model predictive control technol-
ogy. In: American control conference, San Diego, Califor-
nia, USA, 2–4 June 1999, Vol 1, pp. 662–676. New York:
IEEE.
22. Wang Z, Ukita T, Nomura E and Masuda Y. Prediction
of air cooling system for EV/HEV battery pack. SAE
2011-39-7269, 2011.
Appendix 1
Notation
a(k) sampled temperature of the air at the kth
instant (°C)
A surface area of the battery cell, matrix
(m2, –)
Astep matrix (–)
Across cross-sectional area of the battery bank
(m2)
CAh electrical capacity of the battery per cell
(Amp-hour)
B matrix (–)
cp specific heat of air (°C/J kg)
C electrical capacity of the battery, matrix
(F, –)
Cc thermal capacity of the battery core (°C/J)
12 Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering

Cf thermal capacity of the cooling air (°C/J) Tair, r target cooling air temperature (°C)
Cs thermal capacity of the battery surface Tamb surrounding temperature (°C)
(°C/J) Tc temperature of the battery core (°C)
D diameter of the battery (m) Tc, r target temperature of the battery core (°C)
Ecomp energy consumption of the compressor Ts estimated temperature of the battery
(kJ) surface (°C)
E0 nominal voltage of the power source (V) Tss steady-state parameter of the model
E0(i + 1) predicted output error of the array (–) predictive controller (°C)
F0 feedback gain of the optimal controller (–) T^air predicted conditioned air temperature
h convective heat transfer coefficient (W/ (°C)
m2 °C) T^c estimated temperature of the battery core
H vector (–) (°C)
Hc feedforward gain matrix (–) u, u0 optimal inputs of the controller (–, –)
i time instant index (–) u(i) input of the model predictive controller
I load current (A) (–)
IR o current through the resistance Ro (A) u~ optimal magnitude of the input (–)
J(i) cost function of the model predictive U(i-1) past input of the array (–)
controller (–) Vc voltage over the capacitor (V)
k thermal conductivity of air, index (W/m Vmax maximum velocity of the air flow (m/s)
°C, –) Vo output voltage of the battery (V)
Ke controller gain of the model predictive w mean measurement error (°C)
controller (–) x, x^ state vectors (–, –)
L feedback gain matrix of the observer (–) y output vector of the thermal model
m constant of the heat transfer coefficient (–) y(i) measured output at at the ith instant (–)
m_ air flow rate of the air mass (kg/s) yr(i) reference output at the ith instant (–)
M1, M2 positive weighting matrices (–, –) y^(i) predicted output at the ith instant (–)
NuD equivalent mean Nusselt number (–) Yr reference output of the array (–)
P, Q matrices solved by the Riccati equation Y^(i+1) predicted output of the array (–)
(–, –) Y^0(i+1) predicted output of the array (–)
Pr, Prs Prandtl number, Prandtl number of the Y~(i+1) corrected prediction output of the array
surface (–, –) (–)
Qb heat generation rate per battery (W) b1, b2 constants of the step-response model
Qdis total heat removal (kJ) (–, –)
Q1, Q2 positive weighting matrices (–, –) Du(i) input change at the ith instant (–)
R1, R2 positive weighting matrices (–, –) DU change in the input of the array (–)
Rc thermal resistance of the battery core (°C/ r density of air (kg/m3)
W) v(i) compressor speed at the ith instant (r/min)
Re, Ro internal resistances of the battery (O, O) m viscosity of air (N s/m2)
Ru thermal resistance of the battery surface
(°C/W) Abbreviations
Re Reynolds number (–)
ReDmax Reynolds number for Dmax (–) AC air conditioning
s(i) element of the step-response model BTMS battery thermal management system
matrices (°C) EV electric vehicle
S, S0 matrices of the step-response model (–, –) HEV hybrid electric vehicle
SL, ST distances between the batteries (m, m) SOC state of charge (–)
t time (s) SOC0 initial state of charge (–)
Tair measured cooling air temperature (°C)

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 26, 2015