Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Next Energy
journal homepage: [Link]/journal/next-energy

Short communication

Thermal management of lithium-ion batteries using fin-integrated nano-

enhanced PCM under forced air convection: A CFD study ]]
]]]]]]
]]

Md Mahamudul Hasan Pranto , Md Ahnaf Adit, Yousuf Abir Bari

⁎

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rajshahi University of Engineering & Technology, Rajshahi 6204, Bangladesh

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The increasing demand for high-energy-density lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles (EVs) necessitates ad­
Battery thermal management system vanced thermal management solutions to ensure operational safety, efficiency, and longevity. This study pre­
Hybrid nano-enhanced phase change material sents the development and simulation of an improved battery thermal management system (BTMS) in­
Forced convection corporating hybrid nano-enhanced phase change materials (HNPCM) and fin architectures. The addition of Al₂O₃
Lithium-ion batteries
(1%) and graphene (3%) nanoparticles to paraffin significantly enhanced its thermal conductivity by 5.27 times,
Electric vehicle (EV)
enabling superior heat dissipation despite a 7.2% reduction in latent heat capacity. Computational fluid dy­
namics simulations using the Newman, Tiedemann, Gu, and Kim model quantified heat generation rates
reaching 763,999 W/m³ at a 10 C discharge rate. The fin/HNPCM configuration demonstrated a 12.54% re­
duction in maximum cell surface temperature compared to the baseline and a 9.62% improvement over fin-only
setups. Furthermore, forced convection outperformed free convection, lowering temperatures by 5.5%. These
results confirm that the hybrid BTMS effectively maintains safe operating temperatures, reduces thermal run­
away risks, and extends battery lifespan. The findings offer a scalable solution for EV applications, with potential
for further enhancements through optimized nanoparticle ratios, fin geometries, and system designs.

1. Introduction and 80 °C [5]. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is a frequently

utilized technique for simulating BTMS. CFD simulations offer insights
The expanding market for electric vehicles (EVs) has significantly into the temperature distribution within battery packs, essential for
increased the demand for efficient thermal management systems in li­ enhancing thermal management [6]. In contrast to fundamental
thium-ion batteries (LiBs) to ensure safety, performance, and longevity thermal models, the Newman, Tiedemann, Gu, and Kim (NTGK) model
[1]. The significant heat produced by LiBs during operation leads to incorporates nonlinear heat generation rates resulting from fluctuations
increased temperature fluctuations within the battery module. This in the state of charge, current load, and temperature [7].
results in diminished operational safety and constrains the battery's In recent years, phase change material (PCM)-based BTMS has at­
longevity. Therefore, efficient thermal management, including both tracted significant interest as an effective option for battery cooling.
active and passive strategies, is crucial for sustaining acceptable oper­ PCMs absorb heat produced by LiBs during phase transitions, efficiently
ating temperatures [2]. To maintain the efficacy and reliability of the managing battery temperature and sustaining it within the PCM's
battery pack, a battery thermal management system (BTMS) is neces­ melting range for an extended period [8]. PCMs face challenges such as
sary [3]. Zhou et al. showed that recent advances in silicon-based an­ low thermal conductivity and limited heat transfer efficiency, which
odes offer significant improvements in energy density. However, their hinder effective heat dissipation and utilization of latent heat during
severe volume expansion and solid–electrolyte interphase instability phase transitions. These issues can slow solidification, reduce cooling
during cycling created durability and safety challenges. In high-energy performance, and create temperature gradients, leading to higher bat­
LiBs, these instabilities can exacerbate degradation risks, further em­ tery temperatures once the PCM fully melts. To address this, heat
phasizing the importance of effective battery thermal management to transfer enhancement techniques are essential to improve PCM effi­
maintain safe and reliable operation [4]. To attain the best perfor­ ciency by accelerating heat dissipation and recovery of latent heat [9].
mance, it is recommended to maintain the operational temperature The addition of nanoparticles to PCM can accelerate its solidification
between 15 and 35 ºC. To avoid quick battery capacity degradation and process for energy storage, thereby enhancing its thermal properties
thermal runaway, the temperature must be maintained between 60 °C and overall efficiency [10]. The fin effect in BTMS relates to the design

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: pmahamud1983@[Link] (M.M.H. Pranto).

[Link]
Received 18 April 2025; Received in revised form 3 February 2026; Accepted 19 February 2026
2949-821X/© 2026 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ([Link]
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

and optimization of fins to enhance heat dissipation and overall thermal difference by 4.0 °C compared to dry air cooling. These quantitative
efficacy. The efficacy of fins is intricately linked to their geometry, as improvements highlight the potential of combined cooling strategies to
particular designs can improve heat transfer coefficients, which are enhance uniformity and safety in EV battery thermal management [23].
crucial for effectively regulating thermal loads in batteries [8]. Kaplan This research focuses on the development of an advanced BTMS
et al. [11] found that the use of circular fins can enhance heat discharge utilizing a computer aided design (CAD) model for high-energy-density
by 48% and increase outlet temperatures by 39% compared to straight cylindrical lithium-ion cells. The suggested system integrates a hybrid
fin designs. Biomimetic fin structures enhance heat transfer by aug­ nano-enhanced phase change material (HNPCM) with a fin structure for
menting surface area, optimizing fluid dynamics, and minimizing flow effective temperature regulation. The fundamental objective is to reg­
resistance, all derived from nature-inspired designs [12]. Ranjan et al. ulate the cell temperature within an appropriate range to reduce de­
[13] investigated the application of PCM in conjunction with Al2O3 terioration, avert thermal runaway, and ultimately prolong the cell’s
nanoparticles at different weight percentages. Their research showed lifespan.
that n-PCM at a 4% weight fraction, along with air cooling, decreased
the battery temperature by 40%. Emmi et al. [14] investigated paraffin 2. Material and methodology
PCM enhanced with graphene oxide at 1.5% and 3% mass concentra­
tions. The addition of graphene oxide improved thermal conductivity, 2.1. Material preparation
leading to a heat flux increase of up to 24% during heating and 31%
during cooling. Ping et al. [15] showed that fins can effectively regulate HNPCM was prepared using the widely employed 2-step method
the temperature of prismatic batteries, ensuring that it does not exceed [24]. Paraffin wax was first melted in a beaker on a hot plate at 70 °C
65 °C even under high discharge rates. Their numerical model indicated (Hotplate with Magnetic Stirrer, 78–1, China). Upon complete melting,
that smaller fins with appropriate spacing and thicker PCM layers are Al₂O₃ and graphene nanoparticles were added at concentrations of 1%
the most suitable configuration. Shen et al. [16] developed a PCM- and 3%, respectively, and the mixture was mechanically stirred at
based BTMS influenced by the bionic architecture of spider webs, in­ 800 rpm and 70 °C for 120 min using a magnetic stirrer (Hotplate with
tegrating fins like those of spider webs. Their evaluation of thermal Magnetic Stirrer, 78–1, China). Following this, the mixture was soni­
performance at a high rate of 8 °C revealed that the maximum tem­ cated for 60 minutes at medium frequency in an ultrasonication bath
perature of the battery pack diminished from an initial 57.7 °C to (Ultrasonic Bath 5 Liter, YJ5120–1 Digital Ultrasonic Cleaner, China) to
42.1 °C, indicating a reduction of 27.1%. Zheng et al. developed a achieve full dispersion of the nanoparticles within the PCM. A digital
shape-stable composite PCM using lauric acid supported by melamine weighing instrument (AND FGH Series Digital Precision Weight Bal­
foam and enhanced with 15 wt% aluminum nitride, which increased ance, South Korea) was used to measure all required quantities pre­
the CPCM’s thermal conductivity by 54% compared to the composite cisely. No surfactant was added to avoid altering the intrinsic thermo­
without aluminum nitride. Under a 3 C discharge rate, using this CPCM physical properties of the PCM. The whole process is depicted as a
reduced the maximum battery surface temperature by 25% and the schematic diagram in Fig. 1.
temperature difference by 84% compared to a battery without any These processes of heating above the PCM melting temperature,
CPCM thermal management [17]. Sun et al. studied a passive BTMS mechanical stirring, and ultrasonic treatment effectively minimize na­
using composite PCM with fins and showed that the PCM-Fin system noparticle agglomeration and promote homogeneous distribution
significantly reduced peak battery temperatures compared to PCM within the molten PCM. The dispersion stability was verified through
alone, even under a 20 W heat generation rate. The optimized design visual inspection after repeated heating–cooling cycles, during which
with 1 ring and 8 fins enhanced heat transfer and temperature uni­ no sedimentation or phase separation was observed. Thermal con­
formity [18]. Husainy et al. investigated a eutectic KCl-NaCl PCM en­ ductivity measurements were repeated multiple times under identical
hanced with graphene and CuO nanoparticles in a refrigeration test rig. conditions, and the reported values represent averaged results, de­
The graphene-based NEPCM showed higher heat transfer rates than monstrating good repeatability. This confirms that the observed en­
CuO composites, maintained 10–12 °C during power-off conditions, and hancement of thermal conductivity from 0.22 W/m·K to 1.16 W/m·K
improved thermal performance while reducing electricity consumption (an increase of 5.27 times) is primarily due to uniform nanoparticle
by 13–15% [19]. dispersion rather than local fluctuations or agglomeration effects.
Active cooling techniques, which rely on externally driven fluids or A hybrid nanoparticle loading of 3.0 wt% graphene and 1.0 wt%
auxiliary systems, have been widely investigated to improve thermal Al₂O₃ (total 4.0 wt%) was selected to maximize thermal-conductivity
regulation in batteries and energy systems. Riahi et al. investigated a enhancement while avoiding excessive increases in viscosity and de­
PCM-assisted vapor compression system and found that adding a PCM gradation of latent heat. Carbon-based additives such as graphene are
tank can reduce on-peak energy consumption by up to 84.5% compared well known for providing substantial thermal-conductivity improve­
to a conventional air conditioning (AC) unit, demonstrating the po­ ments in paraffin-based PCMs; for example, Ali et al. reported con­
tential of PCM-based thermal energy storage for improved thermal ductivity enhancements of approximately 43%, 74%, and 146% at
management [20]. Sirikasemsuk et al. studied the thermal management graphene mass fractions of 1%, 2%, and 3%, respectively [25]. In
of a prismatic LiFePO₄ battery module using inverse-zigzag channels contrast, Al₂O₃ nanoparticles typically yield more moderate but com­
with TiO₂ nanofluid and Fe₃O₄ ferrofluid flows. showing that sig­ plementary improvements, with Bayat et al. reporting an increase of
nificantly enhanced heat removal compared to water. The inversed- about 12.5% at 2 wt% Al₂O₃ [26]. However, high nanoparticle loadings
zigzag flow configuration reduced maximum temperature gradients can significantly increase dynamic viscosity, hinder heat transfer, and
across the module down to 1.85 °C [21]. Zhou et al. proposed a water- reduce latent heat. Therefore, the total nanoparticle content was lim­
based direct contact cooling system for prismatic LiBs using a thin in­ ited to 4 wt% to ensure acceptable thermophysical properties and stable
sulation coating instead of dielectric fluids. Their system maintained dispersion. The selected 3:1 graphene-to-Al₂O₃ ratio thus represents a
the maximum battery temperature below 35 °C with a temperature balanced compromise between achieving high thermal conductivity
difference within 4 °C, while reducing the maximum temperature by and maintaining suitable PCM handling, dispersion stability, and latent-
20.88% and the pressure drop by 79.78% compared to conventional heat performance.
noncontact cooling [22]. Saechan et al. propose a hybrid cooling Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) analysis was conducted to
method that integrates Hydrofluoroether liquid spray with forced-air to characterize the phase transition behavior of the pure PCM and the
improve thermal management in densely packed EV battery modules, HNPCM. The measurements were performed using a DSC analyzer
showing that optimized spray-assisted forced-air cooling can reduce the under a nitrogen atmosphere to prevent oxidation. Approximately
maximum battery temperature by 5.9 °C and the maximum temperature 5–10 mg of each sample was sealed in aluminum crucibles. The samples

2
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of material preparation. PCM = phase change material.

were heated from 20 °C to 100 °C and subsequently cooled to 20 °C at a shown in Fig. 2(d) to provide a clear view of the cell arrangement inside
constant heating and cooling rate of 5 °C/min. The onset temperature, the module; however, they were included in the computational domain
peak phase transition temperature, and latent heat during melting and during the simulations. Therefore, the BTMS model was designed with
solidification were determined from the DSC curves. All tests were complete physical containment to prevent PCM leakage during phase
conducted under identical conditions to ensure the reliability and transition.
comparability of the results.
2.3. CFD analysis
2.2. BTMS design
This research developed a CFD model for a BTMS using Ansys 2023.
The BTMS design was designed using SOLIDWORKS. Table 1 illus­ The initial phase involved calculating the heat generation rate for a
trates the dimensions of key sections of the BTMS module. The BTMS 32140 Series 15 Ah Li-ion cell utilizing the multiscale multidimensional
module, shown from several perspectives in Fig. 2, emphasizes these (MSMD) battery model in Ansys Fluent. The modeling of LiBs is in­
construction intricacies. Aluminum was chosen for the fin structure due tricate owing to their multidomain, multiphysics characteristics and
to its superior thermal conductivity, lightweight qualities, resistance to diverse length scales. Thermal study concentrates on temperature dis­
corrosion, and ease of machining, which promote good heat transfer tribution at the battery scale, whereas lithium-ion transport transpires
and portability [27]. Fig. 2(a) shows the position of the HNPCM domain at the electrode and particle scales. The MSMD methodology addresses
between the battery cell and the housing. Fig. 2(b) presents the top these issues by resolving physics inside their respective domains [28].
portion of the assembled BTMS model with the battery cell, where the The MSMD technique relies on various chemical sub-models, one of
fins are extended inside the housing to make contact with the battery which is NTGK. NTGK is a semi-empirical electrochemical framework
cell. Fig. 2(c) and (d) illustrate the outer surface of the BTMS, where the [29]. This model can compute transfer current density, phase poten­
8 fins are clearly visible. To address the PCM leakage issue during tials, Joule heating, electrochemical heating, and entropic heating
melting, the top and bottom portions of the system are enclosed with [30,31]. The specifications of the cell material used in simulation are
thin sealing plates, ensuring that the PCM cannot escape through any specified in Table 2. The cell, with a capacity of 15 Ah, supports dis­
gaps when it reaches the liquid phase. These enclosure plates are not charge rates of up to 10 C. The operational voltage range was defined
with a minimum stop voltage of 2 V and a maximum of 3.2 V [32]. In
Table 1 the NTGK formulation, the cell is segmented into 3 primary compo­
Dimensions of the different parts of the BTMS nents.
Part Shape/Model Dimension (mm) No used
The CFD analysis of the BTMS incorporating fins and PCM was
performed inside a fluid domain measuring 80 mm × 80 mm ×
Inner dia. = 42 140 mm. The starting temperature of the fluid and solid domains was
Cylindrical (Housing) Outer dia. = 44 1 established at 300 K, whereas the inlet fluid entered at a velocity of
Height = 140
25 km/h, as recorded by an anemometer within the vehicle battery
Fin structure
Inner dia. = 32 chamber, at a temperature of 293 K. Forced convection heat transfer
Circular (Fin) Outer dia. = 56 8 was implemented solely for the Fin and Fin/HNPCM modules, as the
Thickness = 2 movement of the EV generates forced convection. A free convection
heat transfer coefficient of 5 W/m² K was included in the Fin-only ar­
Inner dia. = 32
HNPCM Cylindrical disc Outer dia. = 42 8
rangement. The pressure outlet boundary condition was set to atmo­
Thickness = 14 spheric pressure. The thermophysical properties of the HNPCM, as
listed in Table 3, were implemented in the simulations. For simplicity,
32140 series Diameter = 32 these properties were assumed to be constant throughout the compu­
Battery 1
15 Ah lithium ion Length = 140
tational domain. However, it is acknowledged that certain properties,
BTMS = battery thermal management system; HNPCM = hybrid nano-en­ particularly the specific heat capacity and thermal conductivity, are
hanced phase change materials. temperature-dependent. Therefore, the use of constant values may

3
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

Fig. 2. (a) Cross-sectional view, (b) Top view, (c) Front view of the (d) BTMS module. BTMS = battery thermal management system.

Table 2 material in the simulation are 2719 kg/m³, 871 J/kg·K, and 202.4 W/
Cell material properties of 32140 Series 15 Ah Li-ion battery [33] m·K, respectively [34,35]. The k-omega viscous model was selected to
Properties Active zone Passive zone
ensure an accurate depiction of flow dynamics and thermal transfer.

Density (Kg･m−3) 2250 8978 2.4. Governing equations

Specific heat (J･kg−1･K−1) 1700 381
Thermal conductivity (W･m−1･K−1) 30(Axial), 0.3(Radial) 387.6
Electrical conductivity (S･m−1) 1,190,000 (uds0), 10,000,000
The NTGK model is a semi-empirical electrochemical model used to
983,000(uds1) simulate battery behavior by relating the current transfer to the po­
tential field within the cell [36]. This model has been widely adopted
due to its balance between computational efficiency and physical ac­
curacy. In this study, the NTGK model was employed in ANSYS Fluent
introduce some deviation from real operating behavior. Nevertheless, using the standard formulation provided in previous literature [37,38].
the selected values correspond to the maximum thermal conductivity The current density j is related to the potential difference be­
and specific heat near the initialization temperature, ensuring that the tween the positive and negative electrodes by the following algebraic
predicted thermal performance is not overestimated. The properties of equation:
the base PCM are also provided in Table 3 for comparison. The density,
j = aY [U ( )] (1)
specific heat, and thermal conductivity of aluminum utilized as fin
+

Table 3
Thermal properties of the materials used in the BTMS configuration

Component Composition Thermal conductivity Specific heat Density Latent heat Liquidus Solidus
(Wm−1K−1) (KJ kg−1·K−1) (kg/m3) (KJkg−1) temperature (K) temperature (K)

Pure PCM 100 w% paraffin 0.22 2.78 (Solid) 900 (Solid) 156.67 338.35 333.86
2.81 (Liquid) 837 (Liquid)
HNPCM Al₂O₃ (1%) and 1.16 3.3 (Solid) 934.24 (Solid) 145.35 337.88 334.43
graphene (3%) 3.6 (Liquid) 868.84 (Liquid)

BTMS = battery thermal management system; HNPCM = hybrid nano-enhanced phase change materials; PCM = phase change material.

4
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

Here, a is the specific area of the electrode sandwich sheet, and Y ( H)

+ ( v H) = (k T ) + S
and U are empirical functions that depend on the depth of discharge t (10)
(DoD). The negative and positive electrode potentials are, respectively
where is the fluid density, v is the velocity vector, k is the thermal
and +. The DoD is calculated as:
conductivity, and S is a volumetric heat source term. For pure con­
duction regions, the velocity v is considered to be zero. Therefore, only
Vol
( )
t
DoD = jdt
3600Q Ah 0 (2) the conduction term contributes to heat transfer in the energy equation.
In the mushy region, where both liquid and solid phases coexist, a
where Vol is the battery volume, and QAh is the total electric capacity in momentum sink is introduced in the momentum equation to account
Ampere-hours. for the resistance offered by the solid structure. The damping source
The functions Y and U are expressed as polynomial series in DoD, term is defined as:
modified by temperature-dependent terms as follows [36]:
(1 )2
5 S= Amush ( v vp)
1 1 3 + (11)
Y= an (DoD )n exp C1
T Tref (3)
n= 0 Here, Amush is the mushy zone constant, is a small stabilizing
parameter (typically 0.001), and vp is the pull velocity, which is re­
3
levant in continuous casting applications.
U= bn (DoD )n C2 (T Tref )
n=0 (4) Additionally, if turbulence is modeled, similar sink terms are added
to the turbulence equations to represent the reduction of turbulence
where an and bn are curve-fitting coefficients, and C1, C2 are NTGK intensity in the solidifying region. These are expressed as:
model constants. T is the temperature, and Tref is the reference tem­
perature. (1 )2
S= Amash
The total energy source term used in the NTGK framework, as in­
3 + (12)
corporated in ANSVS Fluent, accounts for Joule heating, electro­ where denotes the turbulence quantity being solved (e.g., k, , or ).
chemical reaction heat, and entropic heat contributions. It is given by This framework enables the simulation of complex melting and so­
[39]: lidification behavior in PCMs while maintaining numerical stability and
dU computational efficiency, even in the presence of strong nonlinearities
q= 2 + 2 +j U ( ) T
+ + +
dT (5) associated with latent heat effects.

This modeling approach enables the simulation of thermal and 3. Result and discussion
electrochemical interactions within the battery during discharge and
charge cycles, providing valuable insights for BTMS design. 3.1. Material property
In the simulation of solidification and melting phenomena in PCMs,
the enthalpy porosity method is widely used [40,41]. This approach In this study, a unique HNPCM enhanced with 1% Al₂O₃ and 3%
treats the mushy zone, the region undergoing phase transition, as a graphene was developed to investigate whether its thermal properties
porous medium. The porosity is defined by the liquid fraction, denoted surpass those of pure PCM. Higher thermal conductivity and specific
by , which represents the fraction of the cell volume that remains in heat are desired as the higher thermal conductivity ensures rapid heat
the liquid state. The method avoids the need to explicitly track the transfer, uniform temperature distribution, reduced PCM melting time,
moving solid-liquid interface by instead computing the evolution of while higher specific heat increases thermal storage capacity, more heat
enthalpy and liquid fraction iteratively. absorption per unit mass, better thermal buffering, which are critical
The total enthalpy H of the material is defined as the sum of sensible for maintaining battery safety and efficiency in PCM-based BTMS. The
enthalpy h and latent heat content H , given by. addition of Al₂O₃ (1%) and graphene (3%) to paraffin markedly im­
H=h+ H (6) proves the thermal conductivity of HNPCM (which was measured using
thermal conductivity tester DTC-25), elevating it from 0.22 W/m·K to
The sensible enthalpy h is calculated from a reference state using the 1.16 W/m·K, representing a 5.27-fold enhancement, hence facilitating
expression: superior heat dissipation in BTMS applications. Moreover, the specific
T heat capacity of HNPCM surpasses that of pure PCM, enhancing its
h = h ref + cp dT thermal absorption effectiveness. The latent heat of HNPCM decreases
Tret (7)
from 156.67 kJ/kg to 145.35 kJ/kg, reflecting a 7.2% loss; however, the
where h ref is the reference enthalpy, Tref is the reference temperature, enhanced thermal conductivity mitigates this decline by facilitating
and cp is the specific heat at constant pressure. expedited heat transport. DSC test was carried out to obtain the en­
The latent heat content H is defined in terms of the latent heat of dothermic and exothermic peaks of pure PCM and HNPCM in order to
fusion L and the liquid fraction , as: determine the phase-transition properties of the samples and the spe­
H= L (8) cific heat. Fig. 3 presents the DSC heating and cooling curves of pure
PCM and HNPCM, while Table 4 summarizes the corresponding thermal
The variation of the liquid fraction with temperature is governed by parameters. The HNPCM exhibits a phase transition temperature range
the so-called lever rule. For PCMs with a melting range defined by the of approximately 60–67 °C during melting and 55–62 °C during solidi­
solidus temperature Tsolldus and liquidus temperature Tliquidus , the liquid fication, indicating good thermal reversibility. The experimental latent
fraction is defined piecewise as: heat of HNPCM is 145.35 J/g during melting and 148.03 J/g during
solidification, with a relative error below 5%, demonstrating stable
0, T < Tsolldus
T
Tnetre
phase change behavior. In addition, the high enthalpy efficiency
= Tnquanter Tmentu
, Tsollduss T Tliquidus (92.77%) and limited degree of supercooling (6.34 °C) confirm the
1, T > Tliquidus thermal stability of HNPCM during the phase transition process.
(9)
The Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy in Fig. 4(a) confirms
The governing energy equation that incorporates the effects of both that the characteristic functional groups of the pure PCM, specifically
sensible and latent heat is expressed as: the C-H bending vibrations at 720 cm−1 and 1460 cm−1, and the CH2

5
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

Fig. 3. DSC heating and cooling curves. DSC = differential scanning calorimetry.

Table 4
Thermal properties of the materials used in the BTMS configuration

Sample Heating Cooling

Toset,m Tpeak ∇Hexp ∇Hcal RE Toset,s Tpeak ∇Hexp ∇Hcal RE δ ∇T

(˚ C) (˚ C) (J/g) (J/g) (%) (˚ C) (˚ C) (J/g) (J/g) (%) (%) (˚C)

Pure PCM 60.71 65.20 156.67 - - 49.82 61.57 160.58 - - 100 3.63
HNPCM 60.70 65.12 145.35 150.40 3.47 61.84 58.78 148.03 154.16 4.14 92.77 6.34

BTMS = battery thermal management system; RE = relative error; Toset,m = onset melting temperature; Tpeak = peak melting and solidification temperature;
∇Hexp = experimental latent heat of melting and solidification; ∇Hcal = calculated latent heat of melting and solidification; ∇T = degree of supercooling; δ: enthalpy
efficiency.

and CH3 stretching peaks between 2800 cm−1 and 3000 cm−1, remain 3.2. Thermal energy transfer network
intact within the HNPCM. The absence of new peaks suggests that the
graphene and Al2O3 nanoparticles are chemically compatible with the The thermal heat transfer network in the battery module integrates
PCM, involving only physical integration without adverse chemical conduction and convection to enhance heat dissipation. Heat from the
reactions. Furthermore, the thermogravimetric analysis curve in battery is conducted to the HNPCM and fins, where the HNPCM absorbs
Fig. 4(b) demonstrates that the HNPCM maintains excellent thermal it, utilizing its latent heat for temperature regulation. The fins, in direct
stability, with significant weight loss only occurring above 225 °C, well contact with both the HNPCM and battery, enhance conduction and act
beyond the typical operating range for thermal energy storage. Notably, as heat spreaders, dissipating thermal energy to the ambient via con­
the HNPCM shows a slight improvement in thermal resistance com­ vection. As shown in Fig. 5 conduction (red resistors) occurs within the
pared to the pure PCM, indicating that the hybrid nanoparticles act as a battery, fins, and HNPCM, while convection (blue resistors) facilitates
thermal barrier that enhances the overall durability of the composite. heat exchange with the surrounding environment. This integrated

Fig. 4. (a) FTIR plot, (b) TGA curve for pure PCM and HNPCM. FTIR = Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy; HNPCM = hybrid nano-enhanced phase change
materials; PCM = phase change material; TGA = thermogravimetric analysis.

6
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

Fig. 7. Heat generation rate of the cell with respect to time for different dis­
charge rates.

Fig. 5. Thermal network of heat flow in the BTMS module. BTMS = battery
thermal management system; HNPCM = hybrid nano-enhanced phase change established NTGK model for the identical cell, as outlined in their re­
materials. search, we achieved an average heat generation rate of 311.343 W/L,
thereby confirming the precision and dependability of our NTGK
model.
network ensures effective thermal management, preventing localized
overheating in the battery module. 3.4. Effects of BTMS

3.3. Numerical validation The NTGK model was utilized to analyze the cell's behavior during
discharge at various rates. Fig. 7 depicts the volumetric heat generation
A 1 mm element size was selected for both simulations to enhance rate in the cell over time. At an elevated C-rating, the current flowing
computing efficiency while preserving accuracy. This option reduced through the cell is correspondingly increased. The cell produces heat
computational expenses while enhancing resolution and refining the internally due to internal resistance. The internal temperature of the
temperature distribution. The Fin configuration comprised 6,632,348 cell rises due to the reduced radial conductivity of the material. The
elements with a 1 mm element size, the Fin/HNPCM configuration in­ NTGK modeling indicated average heat generation rates of 204,065 W/
cluded 745,199 elements, and NTGK modeling employed 240,172 ele­ m³ at 5 °C, 382,531 W/m³ at 7 °C, and 763,999 W/m³ at 10 °C. The
ments. The mesh quality was considered satisfactory for both NTGK identified maximum discharge rate of 10 C was utilized as an energy
modeling and BTMS simulation, with skewness below 0.8 and ortho­ source in the source term option of the cell zone circumstances. To
gonality over 0.2, hence providing dependable results. The analysis il­ decrease computational time, we employed the average heat generation
lustrated in Fig. 6 revealed that changes in the number of elements had rate in the cooling simulation rather than the NTGK model.
a negligible effect, with variations of less than 1% in both heat gen­ Fig. 8(a) shows the maximum and minimum surface temperatures
eration rate and maximum surface temperature. Drake et al. [42] over time for both free and forced convection heat transfer in the fin
documented an average heat generation value of 307 W/L at a dis­ configuration. The maximum surface temperatures for free and forced
charge rate of 9.6 C for a 26650 LiFePO4 cell. Employing our convection were 328.54 K and 347.68 K, respectively, while the
minimum surface temperatures were 320.9 K and 337.15 K, respec­
tively. The decrease in maximum surface temperature under forced
convection compared to free convection is 5.5%, and the decrease in
minimum surface temperature is around 4.83%. For a 10 C discharge,
the free convection model struggled to maintain the cell surface tem­
perature within the safety range. Since forced convection demonstrated
better performance than free convection only in the fin configuration,
the HNPCM/fin setup was simulated under forced convection condi­
tions. Fig. 8(b) illustrates the temperature rise over time at a 10 C rating
with and without BTMS. The maximum surface temperatures for the
only cell, fin, and fin/HNPCM configurations were 363.47 K, 328.54 K,
and 317.87 K, respectively, during forced convection. The percentage
decrease in maximum surface temperature for the fin configuration
compared to the only cell without BTMS was 9.62%, while for the fin/
HNPCM configuration, the decrease was around 12.54%. The fin/
HNPCM configuration outperforms the fin-only structure because the
hollow spaces between the fins are filled with PCM, which increases the
effective contact area for heat transfer from the battery cell. This im­
Fig. 6. Mesh dependency analysis for different configurations. HNPCM = hy­ provement is mainly attributed to the higher thermal conductivity and
brid nano-enhanced phase change materials; NTGK = Newman, Tiedemann, specific heat capacity of the HNPCM compared with the air present in
Gu, and Ki. the fin-only case. In addition, the higher density and thermal storage

7
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

Fig. 8. (a) Variation of surface temperature with respect to time for free and forced convection heat transfer, (b) Maximum surface temperature over time for
different configurations at 10 C. BTMS = battery thermal management system; HNPCM = hybrid nano-enhanced phase change materials.

capability of the PCM enable the system to absorb and retain more heat
than air. Although the PCM did not undergo complete melting due to its
relatively high melting temperature and the insufficient heat generation
of the battery, it still contributed to enhanced sensible heat absorption,
resulting in improved thermal management performance.
Fig. 9 shows the maximum surface temperature for different con­
figurations at a 10 C discharge rate, while Fig. 10 illustrates the tem­
perature contours of the battery cell surface both with and without the
BTMS at a 10 C discharge rate. Fig. 10(a) presents the temperature
contour predicted by the NTGK heat generation model, indicating that
the central region of the lithium-ion cell becomes slightly hotter during
operation. Fig. 10 presents the temperature contours on the battery cell
surface from an orthographic projection view for the fin-only config­
uration (Fig. 10(b)), the fin structure under forced convection
(Fig. 10(c)), and the fin structure combined with HNPCM filling
(Fig. 10(d)). For Fig. 10(c) and (d), the air inlet is located on the left
side, while the outlet is on the right side. This 2-dimensional surface
view is provided to clearly compare the temperature distribution be­
Fig. 9. Maximum surface temperature for different configurations at 10 C. tween the inlet-side and outlet-side regions. It can be observed that the
BTMS = battery thermal management system; HNPCM = hybrid nano-en­ temperature near the inlet remains lower than that near the outlet
hanced phase change materials. because the incoming air directly impinges on the fin structure with the
highest local velocity, leading to stronger convective heat transfer. As

Fig. 10. Temperature contour of (a) cell without BTMS, (b) Fin (cree convection), (c) Fin (forced convection), and (d) Fin/HNPCM (forced convection) config­
urations at 10 C. BTMS = battery thermal management system; HNPCM = hybrid nano-enhanced phase change materials.

8
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

the airflow progresses toward the outlet, the velocity decreases, and the [7] M. Jeong, H. Lee, J. Yoon, W.-S. Yoon, O3-type NaNi1/3Fe1/3Mn1/3O2 layered
air temperature rises, reducing the local cooling effectiveness. This re­ cathode for Na-ion batteries: structural evolution and redox mechanism upon Na
(de) intercalation, J. Power Sources 439 (2019) 227064, [Link]
sults in a non-uniform temperature distribution and explains the ob­ jpowsour.2019.227064.
served temperature gradient under forced convection conditions. It is [8] D.K. Sharma, P. Agarwal, A. Prabhakar, Effect of fin design and continuous cycling
also evident from Fig. 10(c) and Fig. 10(d) that the introduction of on thermal performance of PCM-HP hybrid BTMS for high ambient temperature
applications, J. Energy Storage 74 (2023) 109360, [Link]
HNPCM leads to a more uniform temperature distribution under forced 2023.109360.
convection conditions. This improvement is mainly attributed to the [9] P. Zare, N. Perera, J. Lahr, R. Hasan, Uniform temperature distribution, prolonged
higher thermal conductivity of the HNPCM compared with the air temperature regulation, and accelerated recovery of battery thermal management
system using a novel fin design, J. Energy Storage 108 (2025) 115054, [Link]
present in the fin cavities in the absence of PCM. As a result, heat is org/10.1016/[Link].2024.115054.
more effectively conducted and redistributed within the module, re­ [10] M.G. Kibria, M.S. Mohtasim, U.K. Paul, B.K. Das, R. Saidur, Impact of hybrid nano
ducing the temperature gradient across the battery surface. PCM (paraffin wax with Al2O3 and ZnO nanoparticles) on photovoltaic thermal
system: energy, exergy, exergoeconomic and enviroeconomic analysis, J. Clean.
Prod. 436 (2024) 140577, [Link]
4. Conclusion [11] S. Kaplan, et al., Innovative arrangement of circular angled fins for maximizing the
discharge performance of triple-tube heat storage systems, Int. J. Low. Carbon
Technol. 19 (2024) 938–951, [Link]
This research demonstrates the successful development of an ad­ [12] Z. Zhu, J. Li, H. Peng, D. Liu, Nature-inspired structures applied in heat transfer
vanced BTMS that integrates HNPCM with fin architectures, delivering enhancement and drag reduction, Micromachines 12 (6) (2021) 656, [Link]
significant improvements in thermal regulation for high-energy-density org/10.3390/mi12060656.
[13] R. Ranjan, R. Kumar, T. Srinivas, Thermal performance of nano-enhanced phase
LiBs. The incorporation of Al₂O₃ (1%) and graphene (3%) nanoparticles change material and air-based lithium-ion battery thermal management system: an
enhanced the thermal conductivity of the PCM by a factor of 5.27, fa­ experimental investigation, J. Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110567, [Link]
cilitating efficient heat dissipation despite a modest 7.2% reduction in 10.1016/[Link].2024.110567.
[14] G. Emmi, E. Baccega, S. Cesari, L. Giacon, A. Zarrella, M. Bottarelli, Experimental
latent heat capacity. Using NTGK modeling, heat generation rates were analysis of a graphene oxide-enhanced paraffin PCM, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2648 (1)
quantified, reaching up to 763,999 W/m³ at a 10 C discharge rate. (2023) 012047, [Link]
Under forced convection, the fin/HNPCM configuration achieved a [15] F. He, L. Ma, Thermal management of batteries employing active temperature
control and reciprocating cooling flow, Int. J. Heat. Mass Transf. 83 (2015)
maximum surface temperature of 317.87 K, representing a 12.54% re­ 164–172, [Link]
duction compared to the baseline cell and a 9.62% improvement over [16] X. Shen, X. Zhang, M. Chen, D. Chen, Thermal management performance of spi­
fin-only configurations. Forced convection further outperformed free derweb-like fins enhanced phase change material cooling system for lithium-ion
batteries, J. Energy Storage 97 (2024) 112973, [Link]
convection, reducing surface temperatures by 5.5%. These findings 2024.112973.
confirm the BTMS's ability to maintain cell temperatures within safe [17] N. Zheng, C. Zhang, R. Fan, Z. Sun, Melamine foam-based shape-stable phase
operational limits, mitigate the risk of thermal runaway, and extend change composites enhanced by aluminum nitride for thermal management of li­
thium-ion batteries, J. Energy Storage 52 (2022) 105052, [Link]
battery lifespan, offering a scalable solution for EV applications.
[Link].2022.105052.
Future research should focus on extending this approach to battery [18] Z. Sun, R. Fan, F. Yan, T. Zhou, N. Zheng, Thermal management of the lithium-ion
pack-level configurations to evaluate scalability and real-world applic­ battery by the composite PCM-Fin structures, Int. J. Heat. Mass Transf. 145 (2019)
ability. Optimizing the simulated model prior to fabrication will minimize 118739, [Link]
[19] A.S.N. Husainy, S.K. Kale, S.M. Sawant, A. Sur, S.D. Patil, Heat Transfer
material usage and enhance thermal management across various battery Phenomenon of Nano-Enhanced Phase Change Material (NEPCM) Incorporated in
cell designs. Additionally, further exploration of alternative hybrid PCMs, Refrigeration Test Rig, ES Energy Environ. 23 (2024) 1099, [Link]
advanced nanomaterials, and fin geometries could unlock even greater 30919/esee1099.
[20] A. Riahi, M.B. Shafii, Experimental Evaluation of a Vapor Compression Cycle
thermal performance, contributing to the development of more sustain­ Integrated With a Phase Change Material Storage Tank for Peak Load Shaving, Eng.
able and efficient EV technologies. Most importantly, future studies Sci. 23 (2023) 870, [Link]
should evaluate the safety performance of the thermal management [21] S. Sirikasemsuk, P. Vengsungnle, S.E. Eiamsa-ard, P. Naphon, Thermal Management
of Prismatic LiFePO4 Battery Module with Inversed-Zigzag Channeled Ferrofluid
system under extreme conditions, such as overcharging, overdischarging, Flows, Eng. Sci. 27 (2024) 1017, [Link]
or short circuits, to assess its effectiveness in preventing thermal runaway [22] T. Zhou, J. Wu, X. Liu, X. Jiao, N. Zheng, Z. Sun, A novel water-based direct contact
and further enhance the system’s practicality and safety. cooling system for thermal management of lithium-ion batteries, J. Energy Storage
107 (2025) 114973, [Link]
[23] P. Saechan, I. Dhuchakallaya, F.A.Z.M. Saat, Thermal Performance Improvement of
Declaration of Competing Interest Forced-Air Cooling System Combined with Liquid Spray for Densely Packed Batteries
of Electric Vehicle, Eng. Sci. 24 (2023) 886, [Link]
[24] Md. G. Kibria, U.K. Paul, Md. S. Mohtasim, B.K. Das, N.N. Mustafi, Characterization,
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
optimization, and performance evaluation of PCM with Al2O3 and ZnO hybrid na­
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ­ noparticles for photovoltaic thermal energy storage, Energy Built Environ. 6 (6)
ence the work reported in this paper. (2025) 1118–1141, [Link]
[25] M.A. Ali, Fayaz, R.F. Viegas, M.B. Shyam Kumar, R.K. Kannapiran, M. Feroskhan,
Enhancement of heat transfer in paraffin wax PCM using nano graphene composite
References for industrial helmets, J. Energy Storage 26 (2019) 100982, [Link]
1016/[Link].2019.100982.
[1] Suresh Kumar, [Link] Shukla, Jaydeep Shah, Thermal management lithium- [26] M. Bayat, M.R. Faridzadeh, D. Toghraie, Investigation of finned heat sink perfor­
ion battery for electric vehicles with using cold plate, World J. Adv. Eng. Technol. mance with nano enhanced phase change material (NePCM), Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog.
Sci. 12 (1) (2024) 087–094, [Link] 5 (2018) 50–59, [Link]
[2] G. Rasool, et al., Recent advancements in battery thermal management system [27] J.C. Benedyk, Aluminum alloys for lightweight automotive structures, Materials,
(BTMS): a review of performance enhancement techniques with an emphasis on Design and Manufacturing for Lightweight Vehicles, Elsevier, 2010, pp. 79–113,
nano-enhanced phase change materials, Heliyon 10 (17) (2024) e36950, https:// [Link]
[Link]/10.1016/[Link].2024.E36950. [28] G.-H. Kim, K. Smith, K.-J. Lee, S. Santhanagopalan, A. Pesaran, Multi-domain
[3] D. Zou, et al., Preparation of a novel composite phase change material (PCM) and its modeling of lithium-ion batteries encompassing multi-physics in varied length
locally enhanced heat transfer for power battery module, Energy Convers. Manag. scales, J. Electrochem. Soc. 158 (8) (2011) A955, [Link]
180 (2019) 1196–1202, [Link] 3597614.
[4] Y. Zhou, et al., Development of Silicon-Based Anode for Lithium-Ion Batteries and [29] K.H. Kwon, C.B. Shin, T.H. Kang, C.-S. Kim, A two-dimensional modeling of a li­
Its Application in Solid-State Electrolytes, Eng. Sci. 28 (2024) 1060, [Link] thium-polymer battery, J. Power Sources 163 (1) (2006) 151–157, [Link]
org/10.30919/es1060. 10.1016/[Link].2006.03.012.
[5] M.A. Adit, M.M.H. Pranto, Md.G. Kibria, Advanced thermal management of lithium- [30] U.S. Kim, C.B. Shin, C.-S. Kim, Effect of electrode configuration on the thermal
ion battery using fin-enhanced PCM: a CFD study, Future Batter. 6 (2025) 100076, behavior of a lithium-polymer battery, J. Power Sources 180 (2) (2008) 909–916,
[Link] [Link]
[6] M. Shendre , V. Kumar, Electro-Thermal Simulation Methodology for Battery [31] U. Seong Kim, J. Yi, C.B. Shin, T. Han, S. Park, Modeling the dependence of the
Thermal Management System (BTMS) Performance Evaluation of Li-Ion Battery discharge behavior of a lithium-ion battery on the environmental temperature, J.
Electric Vehicles, 2023. doi: 10.4271/2023-28-0005. Electrochem. Soc. 158 (5) (2011) A611, [Link]

9
M.M.H. Pranto, M.A. Adit and Y.A. Bari Next Energy 11 (2026) 100561

[32] Applications • Electric 2 & 3 Wheelers • Light Commercial Vehicles (eLCV) • Electric [37] U.S. Kim, C.B. Shin, C.-S. Kim, Effect of electrode configuration on the thermal
Utility Vehicles • Hybrid-Electric Marine • UPS and Telecom Backup • Residential behavior of a lithium-polymer battery, J. Power Sources 180 (2) (2008) 909–916,
Energy Storage • Material Handling and AGVs • Industrial Equipment 32140 [Link]
Lithium Ion Energy Cell, 2024. [Online]. Available: 〈[Link]/ [38] U. Seong Kim, J. Yi, C.B. Shin, T. Han, S. Park, Modeling the dependence of the
contact〉. discharge behavior of a lithium-ion battery on the environmental temperature, J.
[33] H. Yu, et al., Thermal parameters of cylindrical power batteries: Quasi-steady Electrochem. Soc. 158 (5) (2011) A611, [Link]
state heat guarding measurement and thermal management strategies, Appl [39] G.-H. Kim, K. Smith, K.-J. Lee, S. Santhanagopalan, A. Pesaran, Multi-domain modeling
Therm Eng 231 (2023) 120959, [Link] of lithium-ion batteries encompassing multi-physics in varied length scales, J.
2023.120959 Aug. Electrochem. Soc. 158 (8) (2011) A955, [Link]
[34] A. Zhang, Y. Li, Thermal conductivity of aluminum alloys—a review, Materials 16 [40] V.R. Voller, C. Prakash, A fixed grid numerical modelling methodology for con­
(8) (2023) 2972, [Link] vection-diffusion mushy region phase-change problems, Int. J. Heat. Mass Transf.
[35] M. Asif, M.A. Ahad, M.F.H. Iqbal, S. Reyaz, Experimental investigation of thermal 30 (8) (1987) 1709–1719, [Link]
properties of tool steel and mild steel with heat treatment, Mater. Today Proc. 45 [41] V.R. Voller, Modeling solidification processes, In Mathematical Modeling of Metals
(2021) 5511–5517, [Link] Processing Operations Conference, American Metallurgical Society, 1987.
[36] K.H. Kwon, C.B. Shin, T.H. Kang, C.-S. Kim, A two-dimensional modeling of a li­ [42] S.J. Drake, et al., Heat generation rate measurement in a Li-ion cell at large C-rates
thium-polymer battery, J. Power Sources 163 (1) (2006) 151–157, [Link] through temperature and heat flux measurements, J. Power Sources 285 (2015)
10.1016/[Link].2006.03.012. 266–273, [Link]

10