energies

Article
Adopting a Conversion Design Approach to Maximize the
Energy Density of Battery Packs in Electric Vehicles
Erika Pierri 1, *,† , Valentina Cirillo 2 , Thomas Vietor 1 and Marco Sorrentino 2

1 Institute of Engineering Design, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Hermann-Blenk-Straße 42,

38108 Braunschweig, Germany; t.vietor@tu-braunschweig.de
2 Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, via Giovanni Paolo II 132, 84084 Fisciano, Italy;
v.cirillo15@studenti.unisa.it (V.C.); msorrentino@unisa.it (M.S.)
* Correspondence: erika.pierri@tu-braunschweig.de
† Current address at: Institute of Machine Tools and Production Technology,
Technische Universität Braunschweig, Langer Kamp 19B, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany.

Abstract: Innovative vehicle concepts have been developed in the past years in the automotive
sector, including alternative drive systems such as hybrid and battery electric vehicles, so as to
meet the environmental targets and cope with the increasingly stringent emissions regulations.
The preferred hybridizing technology is lithium-ion battery, thanks to its high energy density. The
optimal integration of battery packs in the vehicle is a challenging task when designing e-mobility
concepts. Therefore, this work proposes a conceptual design procedure aimed at optimizing the
sizing of hybrid and battery electric vehicles. Particularly, the influence of the cell type, physical
disposition and arrangement of the electrical devices is accounted for within a conversion design
framework. The optimization is focused on the trade-off between the battery pack capacity and





 weight. After introducing the main features of electric traction systems and their challenges compared
to conventional ones, the relevant design properties of electric vehicles are analyzed. A detailed
Citation: Pierri, E.; Cirillo, V.;
Vietor, T.; Sorrentino, M. Adopting a
strategy, encompassing the selection of battery format and technology, battery pack design and
Conversion Design Approach to final assessment of the proposed set-up, is presented and implemented in an exemplary application,
Maximize the Energy Density of assuming an existing commercial vehicle as the reference starting layout. Prismatic, cylindrical
Battery Packs in Electric Vehicles. and pouch cells are configured aiming at achieving installed battery energy as close as possible
Energies 2021, 14, 1939. https:// to the reference one, while meeting the original installation space constraint. The best resulting
doi.org/10.3390/en14071939 configuration, which also guarantees similar peak power performance of the reference battery-pack,
allows reducing the mass of the storage system down to 70% of its starting value.
Academic Editor: Branislav Hredzak

Keywords: electric mobility; battery electric vehicles; lithium-ion batteries; engineering conceptual
Received: 22 February 2021
design; conversion design
Accepted: 29 March 2021
Published: 31 March 2021

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

1. Introduction
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil- The transportation sector accounts for a significant amount of global greenhouse
iations. gas emissions (GHG). The growth in world population during the last century has led to
an increased demand for vehicles and a consequent increase in CO2 and NOx emissions.
According to recent forecasts, the number of vehicles will increase to two and a half
billion until 2050, contributing to a further degradation of environmental conditions [1].
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Consequently, if this increasing amount is covered exclusively by traditional means of
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
transport, equipped with common internal combustion engines, a huge demand for fuel
This article is an open access article
will inevitably run out the primary resource reserves, already hardly tested by the massive
distributed under the terms and exploitation that occurred in the last years. Action is needed now to avoid or at least reduce
conditions of the Creative Commons the concerning consequences of climate change.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// In this context, the automotive industry has been pushed into a challenging transition,
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ towards the development of combustion-free vehicles. Alternatives to conventional internal
4.0/). combustion engine vehicles, such as hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) and battery electric

Energies 2021, 14, 1939. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14071939 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2021, 14, 1939 2 of 24

vehicles (BEV), have already been successfully introduced to the market or are currently
receiving increasing attention, as is fuel cell vehicle technology [2]. In light of the increasing
worldwide acceptance of electricity-powered vehicles, car manufacturers are intending to
embark on the market for electric vehicles [3].
However, electric vehicles currently present higher prices than conventional vehicles
and are not considered a mature technology yet. The most common trend is to underesti-
mate EV performances and ranges [4] and overestimate the overall recharging cost, which
could indeed benefit from adequate planning measures [5]. To overcome this widespread
lack of knowledge, society’s perception shall be changed and EV performances and prices
must become competitive compared to existing options. Hence, it is fundamental to pro-
mote these new technologies by providing more incentives to the best alternatives for
electric transport [6].
Governments are boosting investments in research and development, particularly in
the domain of traction batteries. Improvements in battery technology are indeed needed,
concerning, for instance, their durability and efficiency in terms of energy density, safety
issues, appropriate recycling and disposal practices, as well as design strategies for an
effective vehicle integration. The technological development of storage systems in the
electronics sector is necessary, so as to introduce vehicles in the automotive market that
allow wider ranges, able to cover the individual daily average distance, provide better
performance than traditional vehicles and, in parallel, considerably reduce the pollutant
emissions [7,8]. The improvement of those crucial technical parameters, together with the
promotion of renewable energy sources, could yield in the near future the long-awaited
green revolution of the automotive sector [9].
Research work in the field of batteries for EV applications has mostly focused on the
cell electrode materials, battery modelling methods to assess the battery state, health and
safety and on integration of the charging infrastructure for EVs [10]. In BEVs and HEVs
the integration of the battery pack is crucial in terms of vehicle dynamics and stability, as
the battery pack is one of the heaviest components. The battery cell type and geometry
as well as the disposition of the cells within the battery module can determine the total
number of cells, their capacity and hence the overall range of the vehicle [11]. An optimal
disposition of the battery cells according to the given restrictions is crucial to increase the
energy density of the battery pack.
In the current research work, BEV and HEV configurations are examined and the
optimal integration of energy storage systems is evaluated through a design methodology.
This research work thus aims at the development of a conversion design procedure to
optimize the integration of battery packs in commercial vehicles. The main purpose is to
maximize the energy and power density of the selected battery, taking into account technical
and geometrical constraints, by means of advanced conceptual design methodologies.
The latter were indeed already proven effective both for electric vehicle light-weighting
purposes [12], as well as to enhance the spreading of electrified aviation services [13].

2. State of Art and Research

2.1. Electric Vehicles
2.1.1. Classification and General Features
Electrification in the transportation sector is crucial to fulfil the targets of sustainable
development. In the near future, electric vehicles will most likely dominate the vehicle
market [14,15]. The spread of these propulsion systems was historically slowed down
due to the technological inability to provide sufficient charge density to cover significant
distances and provide performances in line with the ones required by the users. In the
last years, the technological development of storage systems in the electronics sector has
increased the attractiveness of electric vehicles [7].
Electric vehicles can be classified into battery electric vehicles (BEV), hybrid electric
vehicles (HEV), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) and fuel cell electric vehicles
(FCEV) [16]. This research work focuses on BEV and HEV systems.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 3 of 24

Battery electric vehicles run fully electric and the combustion engine is replaced by
a battery system with rechargeable batteries [17]. The energy storage system, i.e., the
battery pack, is the most expensive and also the most crucial component, as the battery
capacity determines the range of the vehicle. The main drawback of BEVs is currently the
relatively limited range compared to conventional vehicles, due to technical and design
constraints [11].
Hybrid electric vehicles combine the benefits of fuel-based engines and electric motors
and can be configured in different ways [16,18]. In all hybrid electric vehicles, the internal
combustion engine provides most of the required power, while the electric motor is pow-
ered by a storage system and is used as secondary source of power. HEV configurations
are more complex than those of BEVs, as they include more components. HEVs are usually
classified into series and parallel configurations.

2.1.2. Conversion and Purpose Design

The design procedure is the relevant step within the development process in the
automotive sector, closely linked to the research and production areas that are focused on
the coordination of vehicle dimensions, material concepts and production processes.
The design process of electrified vehicles is based on the same principles of con-
ventional vehicles: optimal integration of the components, driving characteristics, fuel
consumption, vehicle safety, ergonomics and design. As mentioned above, the battery
pack is a relevant component in EVs and its integration needs to be optimized according to
space limitations.
The methodology to design the battery pack is usually based on the optimization of
electrode materials, state of health, assembly, thermal behavior, mechanical safety and
recycling [19], as described in more detail in the following section. Most of the studies
available in the literature focus on one of those aspects. For an efficient design of the battery
pack, it is important to consider different influencing factors. In [19], a comprehensive
design methodology for battery packs has been proposed, incorporating multidisciplinary
aspects: production, assembly, operation and recycling.
Hence, recent research has been seeking for an optimization of the battery packs. This
work aims instead at investigating an optimal integration of the battery pack in existing
commercial vehicles, taking into account space constraints and vehicle performance in
terms of capacity.
Currently, car manufacturers are adopting two different concepts in the developing
phase of electric vehicles: conversion and purpose design [20].
Conversion design consists of the integration of the high-voltage components into the
existing on-board infrastructure of a commercial vehicle model developed for conventional
engines and the adaptation to the new target use. Using this approach, relatively low
investment costs are required, as the body, interior and chassis of the conventional series
model are retained [21]. Nevertheless, the overall production costs of an electric vehicle are
significantly higher than a vehicle with a conventional driving system, as the production
process and assembly steps need to be adapted to the new product requirements [20]. In
the presented methodology, a conversion design approach is chosen.
In order to enhance the competitiveness of electric vehicles, new design concepts need
to be introduced. Purpose-oriented design involves the development of a new vehicle
model, with a new arrangement of the components, to meet the requirements of an electric
vehicle [9]. Through purpose-oriented design approaches, a long-term reduction of the
production costs can be achieved [20].
Both for conversion and purpose-oriented concepts, in the design phase, rearrange-
ments are required to allocate the battery pack in a crash-safe location and to ensure space
optimization as well as an appropriate weight distribution along the vehicle [22]. Prediction
models, engineering design methodologies and simulation tools can be used to support
the development of electric vehicles, taking into account relevant influencing factors (e.g.,
safety, vehicle dynamics) and components (battery, power electronics, motor, gear) [23].
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 4 of 24

2.2. Battery Technology

The most common rechargeable batteries available on the market, with potential use
on EVs, are lead acid (Pb), nickel-cadmium (NiCd), nickel-metal hybride (NiMH) and
lithium-ion batteries (LIB). Lithium-ion batteries are currently among the most promis-
ing technologies used in the automotive field. Lithium-ion batteries have the highest
gravimetric energy and density, compared to the other commercial typologies.

2.2.1. Cell Geometries

Three main battery geometries are currently available in the market and can be
employed for automotive applications: cylindrical (hard-case), pouch (soft-pack), and
prismatic (hard-case). Apart from their shape, these cell types differ for the inner structure,
the manufacturing process and the cell unit assembly, including the cutting process, the
compound assembly and the final packaging [24]. During the EV design process, several
factors influence the choice of the cell geometry.
The cylindrical cell is the most common technology for primary and secondary bat-
teries. Besides being easy to manufacture, cylindrical cells are characterized by good
mechanical stability and safety properties. The watt-per-hour cost is relatively low, due to
their long life-time [25]. The drawbacks are the low packaging density and the lower heat
transport. Space efficiency in the battery pack assembly is more challenging compared to
other formats [26].
The prismatic cell is characterized by a thin profile, lightness and space efficiency.
In fact, its rectangular shape and thinness facilitate layering and give product designers
increased flexibility. Nevertheless, they are more expensive than cylindrical cells to design
and manufacture, thus becoming expensive for consumers too. In addition, there is a
limited number of standardized sizes in the market compared to cylindrical cells.
The pouch cell is a lightweight alternative of battery design. Conductive foils are
welded around the electrodes and sealed in a so-called pouch bag [27]. Therefore, the
metal enclosure is eliminated and the space can be used more efficiently, resulting in an
overall reduced weight. However, a great disadvantage is the swelling that can occur due
to gassing. It is therefore recommended not to stack pouch cells vertically, but rather to lay
them side by side [28].
Cylindrical and prismatic cells present better safety performance properties than
pouch cells because of their hard cases and the presence of a pressure valve. They are
therefore considered more reliable. Nevertheless, cylindrical and prismatic cell housings
add additional weight to the cell, leading to a reduced energy density. Pouch cells might
be a promising solution for the automotive industry, due to the described properties [24].

2.2.2. Requirements for Automotive Applications

The integration of the energy storage system into the vehicle represents a challenging
task for car designers and manufacturers. The storage system must indeed meet several
requirements, which can be categorized into five main classes: energy, cost, mechanics,
environment and safety (see Table 1).
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 5 of 24

Table 1. Battery requirements matrix for electric vehicle chassis integration [9,29–37].

Group Requirement Description

Depends on the usage of the energy storage
High Efficiency system (ESS) and is strongly influenced by
charging, discharging.
High longevity and Resistance to adverse temperature,
durability charge/discharge cycles
Determines the
High capacity
EV range
The higher the
specific energy,
Energy
the greater
Good Performance High specific energy the amount of energy
that the battery can
retain. Influences the
EV autonomy
Allows fast charging
High specific power
and long storage
Low production cost
Initial
Low material cost
manufacturing cost
Low error cost
Cell geometry Makes good use of the available space
Protection against stresses and collisions
Location
Separation from passenger compartment
Mechanics
Low center of gravity
Stability Minimum stack weight
Good weight distribution
Easily accessible for testing, cleaning,
Access for
replacement, tightening of connections and
maintenance
periodic servicing
Safety
Protection against Integration of heating and cooling system to
temperature changes avoid cell degradation
Crash safety To avoid explosions
Recycling Appropriate recycling practices

Environment Due to the presence of heavy metals and toxic

Disposal chemicals and materials,
batteries cannot be disposed of as solid waste

2.3. Design Variables and Specifications

An appropriate selection of the battery typology and geometry is crucial to achieve
a good performance in terms of capacity, while keeping the overall weight of the battery
pack as low as possible. The selection of the battery pack location is also a key variable in
the design phase, to guarantee the vehicle stability through a correct weight distribution,
while optimizing the available space.
When considering an upscale of the design methodology, the optimal size of a battery
pack can be determined in relation to the overall fleet performance, as presented in [38].

2.3.1. Relevant Battery Operational Parameters

Batteries are rated with a defined voltage and capacity. The battery rated voltage is the
nominal operational voltage, while the capacity, measured in Ah, is the charge that a battery
can supply at a rated voltage. The energy capacity in watt-hours (Wh) is proportional to
the amount of electrode material in the battery.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 6 of 24

Another important parameter of a battery is the energy density, mostly used to com-
pare battery systems. It can be related either to the weight of the battery (gravimetric energy
density or specific energy), or to the volume (volumetric energy density in Wh/dm3 —or
Wh/litre). The higher the density, the lower the weight, when comparing batteries with
similar capacities [39,40].
The power density of a battery is defined as the maximum available power per unit
volume, in W/dm3 or W/liter while, if compared to the unit mass, it is called specific
power and is expressed in W/kg. The power density and specific power are a characteristic
of the battery type and packaging and are crucial in the dimensioning process. However,
a high energy density does not necessarily mean a high power density. A high power
density involves as an output of the system large amounts of energy based on its volume,
thus ensuring high driving performance. On the other hand, if a system has a high energy
density, it is able to store more energy in a small amount of volume and increases the
storage capacity in the system with the same mass.
Another relevant battery parameter is the so-called C-rate, the discharge rate of the
battery, influenced by charging and discharging current.
Batteries are also characterized by the state of charge (SOC), the amount of stored
residual energy, normalized with its total capacity.
The depth of discharge (DOD), is the amount of the battery capacity that has been
discharged. Specifically, it is the amount of capacity in the battery that is usable by the
system for powering the vehicle.
For automotive applications, batteries are connected into modules and packs. In those
conditions, charge–discharge cycles may cause degradation of the battery module or pack,
due to charge imbalances and different thermal characteristics. In order to reduce the
impact of those external factors on the battery life-time, battery equalizers (e.g., cell-to-cell
equalizers) can be integrated [41].
The battery efficiency (also called columbic efficiency) is the ratio of the number
of charges that enter the battery during charging, compared to the number that can be
extracted from the battery during discharging. In general, it can be defined as the ratio of
the total storage system input to the total storage system output. The losses that reduce
columbic efficiency are primarily due to the loss in charge due to secondary reactions such
as the electrolysis of water or other redox reactions in the battery.

2.3.2. Battery Pack Weight

Batteries are among the heaviest components in EVs and can strongly influence
automobile performances and affect vehicle stability through their improper placement
into the vehicle.
The weight distribution influences the positioning of the center of gravity of the vehicle
and hence its drivability [42,43]. A low center of gravity influences the dynamics and
performance positively: the lower the center of gravity, the better the dynamic behaviour
of the car [44].
It is important to remark that the battery pack weight does not change depending on
the battery’s charge level (i.e., whether it is fully charged or fully discharged) while in ICE
vehicles the overall vehicle weight is affected by the fuel level.
Vehicle weight also affects fuel consumption: the heavier the vehicle, the higher the
energy required [45]. Hence, the vehicle weight, closely linked to its size, is a decisive
factor for determining the energy consumption. An increase in HEV weight would have a
negative influence on the fuel consumption, thus the choice of the battery typology is of
major importance.
In the case of BEVs, fuel consumption does not represent a parameter that could be
penalized by the vehicle weight because they are equipped with electric motors instead
of internal combustion engines. However, the weight of the battery has an impact on the
acceleration of the vehicle [46].
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 7 of 24

Battery weight influences the travel range, which is, in turn, directly affected by the
capacity of batteries [47]. Higher battery capacities do not result in a proportional increase
in the range, because higher capacities result in higher inertial masses, which affect the
acceleration [48].

2.3.3. Battery Pack Location

As mentioned above, the choice of the optimal location for the battery pack is crucial
and must take into account various factors that could affect vehicle dynamics, stability
and safety. The variety of typologies and formats of battery cells offer a relatively high
flexibility for the choice of the battery pack location. However, some critical considerations
about the vehicle stability and safety should be made before choosing the final location, in
order to ensure the best performance parameters and guarantee passengers protection in
the event of car accidents and heavy shocks during their driving cycles. The safety and
protection of the ESS is a strong requirement for batteries integration inside EVs, as already
discussed, because the deformation of batteries can lead to hazardous effects [49].
By analyzing and scanning all the existing EV models on the automotive market, it is
possible to evaluate different battery pack installations and, due to safety and available
space considerations, explore new possible ideas for their integration within the structure
of EVs. The most viable locations for the battery pack are shown in Figure 1 and analyzed
below in detail.

Figure 1. Installation and integration of battery pack into the vehicle: Overview of possible locations.
The options (A–D) are based on a benchmarking of available concepts; options (E–H) are possible
solutions to be explored, not yet used in the automotive market.

In the tunnel mounting, a T-shaped battery unit is mounted under the rear seats,
keeping the center of gravity low. The T-shape centers the battery system in the car and
the battery pack is in a more protected area in case of intrusion and collision. However,
the interior floor area is reduced, affecting the coefficient of drag and the aerodynamic
performance [50]. Commercially available car models are currently using this architecture,
such as the Chevrolet Volt and the EV1.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 8 of 24

The floor integration consists of integrating the battery pack under the occupants as a
removable component, using all available space under the seats. This configuration pro-
vides an optimal weight distribution and a low center of gravity. Nevertheless, the battery
could be exposed to impact conditions, leading to leakage or short-circuiting [51,52]. The
models Mercedes B-Class Electric drive, Smart ED, Nissan Leaf and Toyota RAV4 EV follow
this configuration. This configuration is used as benchmark in the proposed use-case.
The rear mounting is another possible arrangement, consisting of locating the battery
pack in the rear part of the vehicle, under the back seat area. This location does not reduce
the vehicle space available for occupants but it makes the battery pack vulnerable in a rear
impact. The Toyota Prius PHEV was designed in this configuration.
The vehicle front area is usually occupied by most of the vehicle components, limiting
the available space for additional components. Hence, the front mounting is not commonly
used in conversion design strategies. In addition, this solution would lead to a bad weight
distribution along the vehicle and a significant shift of the center of gravity. On the other
hand, in the case of crash and fire, this location would be easier to access to extinguish
a fire.
The platform configuration can be used in purpose design strategies, such as the Tesla
S Model. In contrast to the floor-integrated packaging, the battery pack is not removable
and does not require an additional protective structure. This battery system configuration
allows an optimal weight distribution around the vehicle body. Nevertheless, if batteries
are placed out of the vehicle perimeter, side impacts could be dangerous.
Roof integration has not been employed so far by any EV manufacturer; however,
a critical analysis is worthy. Some bus models are in fact equipped with roof-integrated
battery packs [53]. Of course, the design requirements of a car differ from those of a bus
and the integration on a car’s roof would change the overall car geometry, shift the center
of gravity to the upper part of the vehicle and consequently result in poor aerodynamic
and drivability performance. Besides, the battery pack would require an additional casing
to protect the system from the external weather conditions.
The door integration would embed battery cells in the body panels, thus exploiting
an additional space otherwise unused and distributing in an optimal way the ESS weight
between both sides of the vehicle. On the other hand, this configuration obviously adds
complexity to the vehicle structure and manufacture. The weight penalty could be offset
by the use of lighter materials, such as carbon fiber, and by installing very thin pouch cells,
although aging may be a concern. Safety might also be an issue because even a minor
parking mishap where a door gets dented could result in a lower operating mode of the
battery pack or in serious damages. Moreover, battery access for testing, cleaning and the
possible replacement of cells would not be so easy.
Finally, there could be the possibility of adding an external battery pack towed from
the vehicle. This way, the design complexity would be reduced from a structural point
of view because the battery pack would not be located inside the architecture and among
the existing components; nevertheless, other problematic issues would appear. In fact,
since the battery pack would be an external element, not included in the vehicle chassis, it
would be subjected to mechanical shocks and vibrations from outside and thermal stress
because of the different weather conditions. Hence, a protection casing and an appropriate
heating/cooling system would be needed, considering that the wiring system would
be more complex and more expensive. Additionally, the installation of a further heavy
component in the rear area of the car would affect the vehicle stability both because it
influences the center of gravity of the vehicle and makes the driving harder, even in the
case of an easy and simple parking maneuver.
After this analysis, it is easy to understand how much wider the range of options is that
the automotive designers have when the final battery pack installation and/or integration
shall be chosen (see Figure 1). Different areas within the vehicle may be theoretically used,
but the geometry is not the unique factor that drives to the best choice. Vehicle stability
and passenger safety shall be adequately investigated, so as to ensure the vehicles the best
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 9 of 24

performances and, at the same time, to guarantee to the passengers the expected protection
in the event of car accidents and heavy shocks during each drive. Hence, the outcome of
choosing the best battery pack location, between the ones described above, results in a
vehicle with a proper center of gravity and a high crash safety performance. In this way,
EVs can achieve dynamic stability and safety.

3. Methodological Approach
A well-designed battery pack system is essential to ensure high-performing operation
of electric vehicles. Indeed, the vehicle performance parameters are affected by various
factors deriving from the pack design, including the size of modules and cells, together
with the arrangement of the cells in the delimited space and their technical specifications,
such as rated capacity, nominal voltage, weight, etc.
Design methodologies are developed to identify optimal battery pack designs, taking
into account a range of requirements, including velocity, acceleration, capacity, weight
and safety.
The design methodology presented in this paper aims at simultaneously optimizing
two vehicle parameters: the battery pack weight and capacity. Some of the most critical
control factors to be considered in the pack design approach are the battery cell type,
geometry, size, number of cells, location and space between cells and modules.
As depicted in Figure 2, the proposed methodology consists of three main phases.

Figure 2. Proposed conversion design methodology to optimize battery pack weight and capacity,
based on the available pack size within the chosen vehicle configuration.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 10 of 24

In the first phase, the initial vehicle configuration is selected, in order to define the
dimensions of the existing electrical components, i.e., cells, modules and the overall battery
pack. This stage is crucial for the conversion design approach, as it allows to define the
reference architecture, based on the chosen commercial vehicle, and the related restrictions.
The obtained reference is qualitative, compared to the chosen vehicle, because various
assumptions have to be made in this stage. Battery management system and cooling are,
for instance, neglected in the methodology. The main technical parameters are calculated
as follows:
Ncell = n ·m (1)
Cap pack = Ncell ·C [Ah]·V [V] = [Wh] (2)
Weight pack = Ncell · M [kg] = [kg] (3)
where n is the number of cells per module and m is the number of modules in the pack. C
is the rated capacity and V is the nominal voltage of the single cell, whereas M is its mass.
In this way, the overall utilizable space is quantified, as well as the initial pack capacity
and weight, and new design solutions can be developed.
In the second phase, various geometry and topology considerations are considered
for assembling the overall battery pack in the available space, aiming at an optimization of
the capacity and weight of the selected reference vehicle, as calculated in the previous step.
Three specific cell formats are used in the analysis (i.e., prismatic, cylindrical, pouch) and
various battery pack configurations are investigated for each cell typology. A screening of
commercially available cells is made, based on their technical specifications.
Specific optimization strategies for each cell format are developed, taking into account
both cells arrangement in modules and the module disposition in the battery pack. A
rectangular case is assumed as the geometry of the module. The overall battery pack
weight and capacity are calculated for each proposed configuration. A discussion about
the different proposed design configurations investigated in each strategy is made so as to
identify the format solution and relative configuration that provide better results in terms
of the capacity and weight in comparison to the original vehicle scheme.
In the third phase, the best configurations, identified for each cell format in the
previous step, are compared and the final optimal configuration of the cell dispositions
within the module and the battery pack is determined. A CAD model of the optimal
configuration is developed, providing a detailed graphical view of the optimized design,
e.g., the configuration that provides an optimal minimization of mass and maximization of
the energy capacity.

4. Results
4.1. Reference Vehicle and Battery Cells
A conversion design approach is followed; i.e., a commercial electric vehicle con-
cept (BMWi3 (https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/global/article/detail/T0259598EN/
technical-specifications-for-the-bmw-i3-94ah-valid-from-07/2016?language=en, accessed
on 31 March 2021) is used as a reference and modified with the final aim of optimizing
its battery pack configuration. The BMWi3 model has been used as a reference in other
studies, e.g., for powertrain modelling [54].
The BMWi3 was designed with floor battery integration architecture, equipped
with 96 prismatic cells, manufactured by Samsung SDI (https://www.samsungsdi.com/
automotive-battery/products/prismatic-lithium-ion-battery-cell.html, accessed on
31 March 2021). The high-voltage battery system (HVBS) consists of eight rectangular
modules, arranged in four rows of two elements along the drive axle, each containing
12 cells connected in series.
Table 2 provides an overview of the technical specifications for the reference bat-
tery cells.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 11 of 24

Table 2. Technical specifications of the battery pack for the commercial vehicle BMWi3 (94 Ah)
Reproduced from [55], BMW 2016.

High-Voltage Battery Pack

Pack Location Floor integration
Rated Voltage, V 353
Nominal energy capacity, kWh 33.2
Usable energy capacity, kWh 27.2
Pack Weight, kg 198
Module
Nr modules 8
Nr cells per module 12
Cell
Geometry Prismatic
Typology Lithium-ion
Manufacturer Samsung SDI
Nominal capacity, Ah 94
Nominal voltage, V 3.68
Energy, kWh 350
Size (L × W × H), mm 173 × 125 × 45
Weight, kg 2.06

Figure 3 shows the original scheme of the BMWi3 battery pack, reporting the top and
side view, detailing cells and modules disposal and all the geometrical measurements.

Figure 3. BMWi3 battery pack schematic (reference) in floor integration installation (configuration B).

As mentioned above, some assumptions are made to reproduce the ESS structure of
the chosen reference vehicle:
• Modules dimensions are calculated on the basis of the geometrical size of the cell
typology used in the reference vehicle. Samsung SDI 94 Ah cells are arranged, side
by side, in two rows of six elements per each module, thus obtaining 12 cells per
module. Particularly, the length and width of modules are multiple of both sides of
the prismatic cell installed;
• A width of 5 mm is assumed for the module casings;
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 12 of 24

• The distance between modules, without casing, and from modules to the pack bound-
ary is assumed to be equal to 30 mm. However, the design procedure will be con-
ducted assuring and maintaining at least 1.5 cm between module casings because all
the electrical connections between modules always need to be guaranteed;
• No mechanical structure to hold and manage the cells arranged inside the modules
are considered in the design methodology. All the electrical components are simply
disposed next to each other;
• The reference battery pack is manufactured with rectangular models. This shape is
retained also for the design methodology and, therefore, only rectangular cases are
considered in the analysis;
• In the developed design analysis, neither the battery management system (BMS) nor
the cooling systems are considered;
• Only the weight of the cells is considered in the calculation phases; e.g., the external
cases of modules do not affect the overall weight evaluation.
The presence of the frame structure necessary for the installation of the batteries as well
as the cooling and thermal systems would further reduce the available installation space.
The optimization procedure is therefore not based on the real dimensions of BMWi3 battery
pack but rather on a qualitative configuration. Furthermore, since this electric vehicle
model is assumed as a basis for the implementation of the proposed design procedure, the
methodology refers exclusively to the integration of batteries mounted in the lower part
of the vehicle, i.e., floor integration (configuration B). During this study, the geometry of
installation space within the body of the reference vehicle under examination was kept as
fixed and was used to develop new and optimized battery pack configurations.
Considering the technical specifications of the Samsung SDI 94 Ah cells, it is possible
to calculate the number of cells, the capacity and the weight of the BMWi3 battery pack:

Ncell,BMWi3 = 12 cells·8 mod = 96 cells (4)

Cap pack = 96 cells·94 Ah· 3.68 V = 33, 208.3 Wh = 33 kWh (5)

Weight pack = 96 cells·2.06 kg = 197.8 kg = 198 kg (6)
These parameters resulting from (4–6) are the initial variables taken as basis for the
optimization strategy.

4.2. Selected Configurations

The available volume for the installation of the HVBS within the body of the vehicle
under examination has to be properly filled by placing and arranging cells and modules
in the most suitable way. The objective is to correctly balance the weight on the whole
floor of the electric vehicle and, at the same time, limit and minimize the space between
the cells inside each module and between modules in the pack. The greater the number
of cells that can be placed in each single module, the greater the amount of cells that the
pack can host. As a result, the capacity of the converted battery pack will be higher. On the
other hand, increasing the number of cells will definitely increase the overall weight of the
battery pack. Therefore, it is essential to change the number and disposition of cells for the
co-optimization of these two parameters: battery pack capacity and weight.
It is well-known that different design configurations are possible because of the great
variety of cells formats and all the conceivable cells and modules dispositions.
Different configurations (see Table 3) were developed and thoroughly analyzed. Pris-
matic, cylindrical and pouch-cell formats were considered, and commercially available
battery cells were used as reference.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 13 of 24

Table 3. Strategies for cell and module disposition in the specific battery pack configurations with
prismatic, cylindrical and pouch-cell formats.

Cell format Configuration Battery Cell Type Filling Strategy

1 Samsung SDI 94 Ah Cell rotation
2 Toshiba SCiB 23 Ah Algorithm 1
Prismatic
3 Toshiba SCiB 23 Ah Algorithm 2
Re-arrangement of
4 Toshiba SCiB 23 Ah
modules
Original vehicle
module size +
5 Panasonic 18650
straight packaging
(α = 0◦ )
Original vehicle
Cylindrical
6 Panasonic 18650 module size + offset
packaging (α = 30◦ )
Rearrangement of
7 Panasonic 21700 modules + offset
packaging (α = 30◦ )
Rearrangement of
8 BLB2 modules (lateral + flat
cells disposition)
Pouch
Rearrangement of
9 BLB2 modules (only lateral
cells disposition)

Configuration 1 involves the same cells installed in the reference vehicle but oriented
differently, i.e., rotated 90◦ . The cell is arranged vertically, with the longer side parallel
to the y-axis of the reference system, as shown in Figure 4. Based on the geometrical
assumptions and the minimum distances to be respected, a disposition of 90 cells stacked
in nine modules is obtained. Considering the new cell arrangement, six of the 96 cells
originally installed in the reference BMWi3 pack are not included in the new configuration
and, as a consequence, a slight weight reduction is expected.

Figure 4. Pack schematic of configuration 1 with prismatic cells in the floor integration installation of
reference vehicle.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 14 of 24

Configuration 2, 3 and 4 were developed using a cell manufactured by Toshiba, with

a lower average energy density but smaller size and weight than the cells used by the
manufacturer. The aim was to investigate not only the effects that a different prismatic cell
has on energy and capacity performances of the pack, but also its impact on the battery
in terms of overall weight and layout. In both configuration 2 and configuration 3, the
same dimensions of the modules are assumed, arranged as in the initial pack configuration
under analysis.
Two algorithms were developed and applied for configuration 2 and 3, respectively
(see Figure 5):
• Algorithm 1 consists of first filling the longest side (A) of the module space with the
shorter side (b) of the cell (I). This operation is repeated along the shorter side (B) of
the installation space until no battery cell with its long side (a) entirely fits the space
(II). After this first packaging phase, the remaining volume needs to be filled. In the
second phase, the battery cells are rotated 90◦ and disposed along the entire long side
(A) of the installation space (III). This operation is repeated until no further cell can be
added in the remaining space (IV).
• Algorithm 2 consists of first filling the shorter side (B) of the installation space with
the shorter side (b) of the battery cell (I) along the longest side (A) of the space (II).
The remaining space is then filled, during the second packaging phase, along the
shorter side (B), after a 90◦ rotation around the vertical axis of the battery cells (III).
This operation is repeated along the longest side (A) until the remaining space is filled
up.

Figure 5. Reference module filling algorithms used in configuration 2 and 3.

Following the steps of algorithm 1, it is possible to install in the available volume

32 cells per module, resulting in 256 cells for the overall pack. Out of the approach with
algorithm 2, instead, the number of cells that can be inserted is furtherly increased to 272.
Figure 6 shows in detail the single module with the Toshiba SCiB cells arrangement in
both configurations.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 15 of 24

Figure 6. Toshiba SCiB cell disposition in one module, developed for configuration 2 (left side) and
3 (right side).

In configuration 4, the dimensions of the modules are not fixed and equal to those
of the initial BMWi3 pack. The available space is filled by arranging the cells within
the modules and the modules within the pack in the preferred way. The same cell as in
configuration 2 and 3 (SCiB 23 Ah) is used. This configuration is obtained by arranging
51 cells in three rows of 17 in each module along the x-direction, and on the y-direction, six
cells are considered (see Figure 7).

Figure 7. Pack schematic of configuration 4 with prismatic cells in the floor integration installation of
reference vehicle.

In configurations 5–7, the packaging disposition of cylindrical cells into rectangular

modules was analyzed. The cells are placed vertically to the vehicle ground. For the
installation of cylindrical cells, the size and shape of the surrounding case depends not only
on the number of rows and the number of cylinders per row but also on the angle between
the centers of cylinders in adjacent rows. A set of various dispositions with different angles
exists, but arrangements with angles of 0◦ and 30◦ are often used in practice as they are
easy to load. Indeed, two principal arrangements are considered in this design analysis:
straight packaging (α = 0◦ ) and offset packaging (α = 30◦ ).
The straight packaging was employed in configuration 5 (Figure 8, left). This arrange-
ment is obtained by positioning the cylinders in such a way that each one is placed in
ordered rows, with the centers aligned along the same axis, both in the x-direction and
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 16 of 24

y-direction. The angle obtained between the centers of the circular surfaces of adjacent
cylinders in the same row or between two consecutive rows is zero. As a result of the
straight cells arrangement, 252 cells per module are obtained and, in total, 2016 cells are
inserted in the pack. Figure 8 shows that the module available space is not completely filled.

Figure 8. Reference module schematic with cylindrical cells arranged according to straight packing
(left) and offset packing (right).

Configuration 6 is obtained by arranging the cells in the module according to the offset
packaging (see Figure 8, right). Once, the diameter of the cells and the dimensions of the
module are defined. As Figure 8 clearly shows, with this new arrangement, it is possible
to insert in the same available space a greater number of cells, equal to 294 per module.
Therefore, it can be deduced that the offset packaging is more efficient from a geometrical
perspective.
In configuration 7, the Panasonic 21700 cell, instead of Panasonic 18650, is considered.
A comparison between the application of these two cylindrical cells is carried out and two
cases are analysed; the first is the configuration with 18650 cell, the latter considers the
installation of 21700. The BMWi3 pack weight parameter is fixed, and the capacity is then
calculated for both cells.
M pack,BMWi3 198kg
∗
Ncell18650 = = = 4082.4 ∼
= 4083 cells (7)
Mcell,18650 0.0485kg

Cap∗pack 18650 = Ncell

∗ ∼
18650 ·Vcell18650 ·Ccell18650 = 4083 cells·3.6 V·3.2 Ah = 47 kWh (8)
M pack,BMWi3 198kg
∗
Ncell 21700 = = = 2911.7 ∼
= 2912 cells (9)
Mcell,2170 0.068kg

Cap∗pack 21700 = Ncell

∗ ∼
21700 ·Vcell21700 ·Ccell21700 == 2912 cells·3.6 V·4.8 Ah = 50.3 kWh (10)
The second Panasonic cell results a in higher capacity, thus representing the best
solution. Four modules are considered, as depicted in Figure 9: two of them contain
10 rows of 31 cells each, while in two other modules, 20 rows of 11 cells are alternated with
20 rows of 10 cells. Hence, 840 cells and 1160 cells are, respectively, inserted in the two
couples of modules.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 17 of 24

Figure 9. Pack schematic of configuration 7 with Panasonic 21700 cylindrical cells in the floor
integration installation of reference vehicle.

Both configurations 8 and 9 investigate the insertion of pouch cells within rectangular
cases. Car manufacturers that adopt this cells format usually order them vertically and side
by side. This makes pouch cells the technology with the most efficient use of space, thus
achieving a considerably high packaging efficiency. However, the dimensions of most of the
pouch cells found in the market do not fulfill the geometrical boundaries of the reference
module. Pouch cells may also be placed in a flat disposition, parallel to the ground, by
considering the cell’s largest surface as the base surface, and overlapping more cells to form
the modules. Nevertheless, the amount of pouch cells would be greatly reduced and the
existing potential of this cells typology would not be fully exploited. In order to overcome
the issue of commercial cells, pouch cells with smaller dimensions manufactured by the
Battery LabFactory Braunschweig (BLB) for research purposes were used in the analysis.
Configuration 8 consists of 10 modules, in which the cells are arranged in two different
positions: two long modules are placed on the right and left side of the available space with
the pouch cells aligned not vertically but laterally (see Figure 10). To overcome the spatial
boundary, each cell is rotated 90◦ with respect to the usual disposition and is oriented
in such a way that the cell height is parallel to the ground. Hence, the terminals of both
modules are not located in the upper part of modules but they are turned toward the
inner space. In this way, two long modules are generated along the y-axis. Another four
modules equal to two external ones could be positioned between them, but the electrical
connections would be rather difficult. Therefore, a different orientation for the cells was
chosen in the remaining volume: two rows of four modules are located in the inner part,
each of them containing 40 cells piled on top of one another. In these eight modules,
the cells are arranged in a flat position, with the terminals turned toward the center of
the battery pack. The cells in the flat position are located in the inner part of the pack
volume for guaranteeing safety from eventual external impacts and for improving the
vehicle dynamics.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 18 of 24

Figure 10. Pack schematic of configuration 8 with BLB2 pouch cells in the floor integration installation
of reference vehicle.

Configuration 9 follows some of assumptions made for configuration 8. Indeed, the

two external modules located, respectively, on the left and right side of the battery pack are
maintained. The only difference is the arrangement of batteries between the two groups of
cells placed at the two sides of the pack: two new modules are placed in the upper and
bottom part of the remaining space, as shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Pack schematic of configuration 9 with BLB2 pouch cells in the floor integration installation
of reference vehicle.

4.3. Optimized Layout

After defining the strategies to be followed and their application for each cell format,
the main technical parameters can be calculated for all the proposed configurations. To
this purpose, the technical specifications of the investigated cells are referred and the
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 19 of 24

formulas (1–3) are applied. The results are summarized in Table 4 and a comparison
with the reference battery pack is proposed. A new parameter is defined to carry out the
comparison and identify the optimal solution: the ratio between the battery pack capacity
and weight (ρpack ). The cell and pack ratio do not differ as the calculations are based on cell
values and the number of cells per pack configuration. As pointed out above, the analysis
does not consider various factors that would increase the weight of the pack (i.e., battery
pack casing, wiring harnesses, cooling system, etc.), thus affecting the ratios. Based on
these assumptions, the ρcell and ρpack , namely, the ratio on cell and pack level, respectively,
have the same values.

Table 4. Summary table of all pack configurations with prismatic, cylindrical and pouch cell format.

Pack
ρcell Nr Nr Pack Weight ρpack
Group Configuration Cell Type Capacity
[kWh/kg] Modules Cells [kg] [kWh/kg]
[kWh]
Samsung
BMWi3 Reference 0.17 8 96 33 198 0.17
SDI 94 Ah
Samsung
1 0.17 9 90 31.2 185.4 0.17
SDI 94 Ah
Prismatic cell Toshiba
2 0.10 8 256 13.5 129.3 0.10
SCiB 23 Ah
Toshiba
3 0.10 8 272 14.4 137.4 0.10
SCiB 23 Ah
Toshiba
4 0.10 6 306 16.8 154.5 0.11
SCiB 23 Ah
Panasonic
5 0.24 8 2016 23.2 97.8 0.24
18650
Cylindrical cell
Panasonic
6 0.24 8 2352 27 114 0.24
18650
Panasonic
7 0.25 4 2000 34.6 136 0.25
21700
8 BLB2 0.11 4 740 23 214.6 0.11
Pouch cell
9 BLB2 0.11 4 840 26.1 243.6 0.11

The data collected for the four prismatic cells configuration do not show improved
results with respect to the original BMWi3 values. In fact, the pack capacities are lower and
the weight values are higher. The Toshiba SCiB cells lead to a battery pack configuration
with a strongly decreased weight, but, on the other hand, the capacity is reduced. This is
strongly dependent on the specific cell characteristics: SCiB cells have small dimensions
and reduced weight, but they have nominal capacity and voltage values quite lower than
the Samsung SDI cells. Configuration 1 is the only case in the prismatic group that provides
a high capacity and an acceptable pack weight, although the values are not optimized
compared to the original model, having an energy-to-weight ratio equal to 0.17 kWh/kg,
the same as the reference.
By using cylindrical cells instead of the prismatic ones, the weight of the pack is halved.
However, the capacity is also greatly reduced. For instance, the battery pack manufactured
according to configuration 5 would weigh half but would result in a lower capacity. Similar
results arise from configuration 6: a higher pack capacity with a considerable reduction
in weight. Obviously, the offset packaging allows for inserting more cells in the available
space, thus increasing the overall pack capacity. The Panasonic 21700 cells are used in
configuration 7, instead, and the new layout results in a battery pack with a considerably
higher capacity and lower weight. The three configurations obtained with cylindrical
cells exhibit ρpack values that are significantly higher than both the reference model and
prismatic cell usage. This means that all the cylindrical study cases offer good energy to
weight ratios. The best solution is configuration 7: its ρpack is much higher than the others
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 20 of 24

and, at the same time, is able to provide more capacity with an inferior weight with respect
to the BMWi3 configuration.
Finally, the last two configurations with pouch cells show ρpack values that are ex-
tremely low if compared to the original BMWi3 energy to weight ratio. In both cases
under examination, the pack capacity is much lower than the reference one, whereas the
weight is excessive (i.e., over 200 kg). Hence, neither configuration with pouch cells can
be considered optimal, despite the pouch format being the technology with the highest
expectations. This demonstrates that the cell type and its format do not represent the only
factor that influences the performance of the battery pack. The arrangement of cells and
the overall disposition of cells and modules in the pack volume also has major relevance.
The reference vehicle BMWi3 is equipped with Samsung SDI 94 Ah prismatic cells.
The safe integration of Samsung SDI cells in the battery pack has been validated within the
patent published by Samsung and Bosch in 2014 [56].
The results of the proposed methodology show that the configuration that guarantees
an optimized battery pack design with respect to the original BMWi3 pack model, based on
lower weight and higher pack capacity, is configuration 7 with 21700 Panasonic cylindrical
cells, arranged in four modules with an offset packaging. Out of the analyses, these cells
turn out to be the best solution for a co-optimized converted design, thanks to their low
mass and their high packing efficiency. However, the effect of considering additional
parameters and components might significantly influence the outcomes of the analysis.
Components to be integrated in the assessment are, for instance, safety devices, battery
management system, and cooling devices. Those components have an influence on the
space constraints. Factors that could influence the vehicle performance are the safety and
vehicle dynamics.
A detailed CAD model of the battery system was thus developed for the chosen
configuration (see Figure 12). This solid modelling computer-aided software was used to
provide a visual example of how the selected battery pack configuration appears, so as
to better understand how the cell typology and the general layout influences the overall
design and differs with respect to the reference model depicted in Figure 3.

Figure 12. CAD model of the optimal configuration (Configuration 7 with 21700 Panasonic cylindrical
cells, arranged in four modules with an offset packaging).
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 21 of 24

5. Conclusions and Outlook

This research has aimed at setting-up a design procedure for the optimal installation of
battery systems in BEVs, by considering a series of requirements, as well as using an existing
vehicle configuration to demonstrate the effectiveness of conversion design strategies in
optimizing battery installation effects within electric and hybrid vehicle chassis.
Several factors can indeed influence the choice of the battery technology to be em-
ployed, for instance, the specific energy and power required and the battery capacity. In
addition, battery durability and longevity, as well as its geometry, weight, costs and security,
need to be considered in the design process, especially when selecting the proper battery
pack location. Each factor has a certain influence on the overall design of electric vehicles,
as it affects crucial aspects, such as the dynamics of the vehicle, the driving stability and
the safety of passengers. The proposed design procedure focused on two variables to be
manipulated in such a way as to obtain an optimal configuration: the battery pack capacity
and weight. The objective of this procedure was to increase the battery capacity while
decreasing the overall vehicle weight. In order to fulfil this challenging aim, various cell
formats and geometries were investigated and considerations about their arrangement
within the module and battery pack were made. After a careful and extended survey on
technological and cost aspects, lithium-ion batteries were chosen in the study, as they are
increasingly becoming the best choice for automotive applications, due to their higher
specific energy density.
The methodology was implemented using as reference a commercially available
electric vehicle (BMWi3) and the installed battery cells (Samsung SDI 94 Ah). Different pack
filling strategies were developed, depending on the cell format, and the best solutions were
identified. Cylindrical cells provided promising results, having as boundary conditions
the available space to place the cells, as well as the weight and capacity of the reference
battery pack.
Practical guidelines were thus provided, particularly the importance of adopting
a conversion design approach, when aiming at improving installation strategies while
coping with industrial and customer-relevant aspects (i.e., acceleration performance, fuel
economy and/or range). The presented case study can also inspire industrial processes
where conversion design is deployed from the very beginning of the entire vehicle design
task in such a way as to promote a more effective integration of the main powertrain
devices and electric components.
The proposed methodology was applied to rectangular modules. Other geometries
of battery packs can be analyzed in future work following a similar approach. Future
developments can focus on additional components to be accounted for in the analysis, such
as, for instance, the cooling system, the BMS and the electrical connections, adding further
degrees of freedom to the methodology. Finally, cost-effectiveness analyses can be included,
especially when the above-mentioned highly integrated conversion design approach is
selected, opening up the investigation not only to different battery typologies, but also to
other technologies and/or even other hybridization devices (e.g., supercapacitors).
Another relevant parameter to be considered in future research is the power capability
during charge and discharge. The integration of the peak power in the design method-
ology is of great importance to assess specific working conditions, i.e., acceleration or
fast charging.
This paper shall thus be considered as a basis study to be further investigated. The
main aim is to point out how the cells’ disposition and geometry, beyond the pure capacity,
impact the design and performance of the pack. Future work can deepen this analysis,
including the mechanical, electrical and thermal elements not considered in this study, in
such a way as to investigate the same configurations that would reflect the real architectures.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, E.P., T.V. and M.S.; methodology, E.P. and V.C.; investi-
gation, E.P. and V.C.; writing—original draft preparation, E.P., V.C. and M.S.; writing—review and
editing, E.P., T.V., M.S. and V.C.; visualization, V.C.; supervision, E.P., T.V. and M.S. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 22 of 24

Funding: The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support provided by the European
Union, within the framework of the Erasmus + Programme.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Hernandez, A.U.; Miller, J. Methodological notes: Global vehicle sales database. Int. Counc. Clean Transp. 2015. working
paper 2015-7. Available online: https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj8
mtOa9tvvAhWFKs0KHXpYCwkQFjABegQIAhAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theicct.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%
2Fpublications%2FWorking_Paper_Global_Vehicle_Sales_Database_2015-7.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0zsFC5BmPeduznnAQ7RXGA
(accessed on 20 February 2021).
2. Sorrentino, M.; Cirillo, V.; Nappi, L. Development of flexible procedures for co-optimizing design and control of fuel cell hybrid
vehicles. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 185, 537–551. [CrossRef]
3. Yong, J.Y.; Ramachandaramurthy, V.K.; Tan, K.M.; Mithulananthan, N. A review on the state-of-the-art technologies of electric
vehicle, its impacts and prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 49, 365–385. [CrossRef]
4. Esmaili, M.; Shafiee, H.; Aghaei, J. Range anxiety of electric vehicles in energy management of microgrids with controllable loads.
J. Energy Storage 2018, 20, 57–66. [CrossRef]
5. González-Garrido, A.; Thingvad, A.; Gaztañaga, H.; Marinelli, M. Full-scale electric vehicles penetration in the Danish Island of
Bornholm—Optimal scheduling and battery degradation under driving constraints. J. Energy Storage 2019, 23, 381–391. [CrossRef]
6. Pahlavanhoseini, A.; Sepasian, M.S. Optimal planning of PEV fast charging stations using nash bargaining theory. J. Energy
Storage 2019, 25, 100831. [CrossRef]
7. Aziz, M.; Oda, T.; Kashiwagi, T. Extended Utilization of Electric Vehicles and their Re-used Batteries to Support the Building
Energy Management System. Energy Procedia 2015, 75, 1938–1943. [CrossRef]
8. Kempton, W.; Letendre, S.E. Electric vehicles as a new power source for electric utilities. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 1997,
2, 157–175. [CrossRef]
9. Hannan, M.; Hoque, M.; Mohamed, A.; Ayob, A. Review of energy storage systems for electric vehicle applications: Issues and
challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 69, 771–789. [CrossRef]
10. Shui, L.; Chen, F.; Garg, A.; Peng, X.; Bao, N.; Zhang, J. Design optimization of battery pack enclosure for electric vehicle. Struct.
Multidiscip. Optim. 2018, 58, 331–347. [CrossRef]
11. Grunditz, E.A.; Thiringer, T. Performance Analysis of Current BEVs Based on a Comprehensive Review of Specifications. IEEE
Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2016, 2, 270–289. [CrossRef]
12. Schuh, G.; Korthals, K.; Arnoscht, J. Contribution of Body Lightweight Design to the Environmental Impact of Electric Vehicles.
Adv. Mater. Res. 2014, 907, 329–347. [CrossRef]
13. Brown, A.; Harris, W. A Vehicle Design and Optimization Model for On-Demand Aviation. In Proceedings of the 2018
AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Kissimmee, FL, USA, 8–12 January
2018. [CrossRef]
14. U.S. Department of Energy—Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 2011 Annual Progress Report Energy Storage R&D.
Department of Energy (DOE). 2011. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/04/f14/cover_toc_0.pdf
(accessed on 20 February 2021).
15. Boulanger, A.G.; Chu, A.C.; Maxx, S.; Waltz, D.L. Vehicle Electrification: Status and Issues. Proc. IEEE 2011, 99, 1116–1138.
[CrossRef]
16. Un-Noor, F.; Padmanaban, S.; Mihet-Popa, L.; Mollah, M.N.; Hossain, E. A Comprehensive Study of Key Electric Vehicle (EV)
Components, Technologies, Challenges, Impacts, and Future Direction of Development. Energies 2017, 10, 1217. [CrossRef]
17. Andwari, A.M.; Pesiridis, A.; Rajoo, S.; Martinez-Botas, R.; Esfahanian, V. A review of Battery Electric Vehicle technology and
readiness levels. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 78, 414–430. [CrossRef]
18. Subramaniyam, K.V.; Kumar, C.S.N.; Subramanian, S.C. Analysis of Handling Performance of Hybrid Electric Vehicles. IFAC-
PapersOnLine 2018, 51, 190–195. [CrossRef]
19. Li, W.; Garg, A.; Xiao, M.; Peng, X.; Le Phung, M.L.; Tran, V.M.; Gao, L. Intelligent optimization methodology of battery pack for
electric vehicles: A multidisciplinary perspective. Int. J. Energy Res. 2020, 44, 9686–9706. [CrossRef]
20. Kampker, A. Elektromobilproduktion; Springer Vieweg: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014. [CrossRef]
21. Wallentowitz, H.; Freialdenhoven, A.; Olschewski, I. Strategien zur Elektrifizierung des Antriebstranges (Strategies for the Electrification
of the Drive Train); Vieweg + Teubner: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010.
22. Meissner, E.; Richter, G. The challenge to the automotive battery industry: The battery has to become an increasingly integrated
component within the vehicle electric power system. J. Power Source 2005, 144, 438–460. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 23 of 24

23. Danquah, B.; Koch, A.; Weis, T.; Lienkamp, M.; Pinnel, A. Modular, Open Source Simulation Approach: Application to Design and
Analyze Electric Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2019 Fourteenth International Conference on Ecological Vehicles and Renewable
Energies (EVER), Monte-Carlo, Monaco, 8–10 May 2019; pp. 1–8. [CrossRef]
24. Kurfer, J.; Westermeier, M.; Tammer, C.; Reinhart, G. Production of large-area lithium-ion cells–Preconditioning, cell stacking and
quality assurance. CIRP Ann. 2012, 61, 1–4. [CrossRef]
25. Maiser, E. Battery packaging—Technology review. Review on Electrochemical Storage Materials and Technology. In Proceedings
of the 1st International Freiberg Conference on Electrochemical Storage Materials, Freiberg, Germany, 3–4 June 2014; Volume
1597, pp. 204–218. [CrossRef]
26. Wagner, R.; Preschitschek, N.; Passerini, S.; Leker, J.; Winter, M. Current research trends and prospects among the various
materials and designs used in lithium-based batteries. J. Appl. Electrochem. 2013, 43, 481–496. [CrossRef]
27. Barai, A.; Ashwin, T.; Iraklis, C.; McGordon, A.; Jennings, P. Scale-up of lithium-ion battery model parameters from cell level to
module level–identification of current issues. Energy Procedia 2017, 138, 223–228. [CrossRef]
28. Murashko, K.; Pyrhonen, J.; Laurila, L. Three-Dimensional Thermal Model of a Lithium Ion Battery for Hybrid Mobile Working
Machines: Determination of the Model Parameters in a Pouch Cell. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2013, 28, 335–343. [CrossRef]
29. Chen, X.; Gu, C.; Yin, J.; Tang, F.; Wang, X. An overview of distributed drive electric vehicle chassis integration. In Proceedings of
the 2014 IEEE Conference and Expo Transportation Electrification Asia-Pacific (ITEC Asia-Pacific), Beijing, China, 31 August–3
September 2014; pp. 1–5.
30. Tie, S.F.; Tan, C.W. A review of energy sources and energy management system in electric vehicles. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2013, 20, 82–102. [CrossRef]
31. Li, L.; Wu, Z.; Yuan, S.; Zhang, X.-B. Advances and challenges for flexible energy storage and conversion devices and systems.
Energy Environ. Sci. 2014, 7, 2101–2122. [CrossRef]
32. Hofer, J.; Wilhelm, E.; Schenler, W. Optimal Lightweighting in Battery Electric Vehicles. World Electr. Veh. J. 2012, 5, 751–762.
[CrossRef]
33. Xu, B.; Oudalov, A.; Ulbig, A.; Andersson, G.; Kirschen, D.S. Modeling of Lithium-Ion Battery Degradation for Cell Life
Assessment. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2018, 9, 1131–1140. [CrossRef]
34. Berckmans, G.; Messagie, M.; Smekens, J.; Omar, N.; Vanhaverbeke, L.; Van Mierlo, J. Cost Projection of State of the Art
Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric Vehicles Up to 2030. Energies 2017, 10, 1314. [CrossRef]
35. Qi, C.; Helian, Y.; Liu, J.; Zhang, L. Experiment Study on the Thermal Comfort inside a Car Passenger Compartment. Procedia Eng.
2017, 205, 3607–3614. [CrossRef]
36. Stevan, K.; Aleksandar, K.; Atanas, K. Risks and safety issues related to use of electric and hybrid vehicles. Trans Motauto World
2017, 2, 37–40.
37. Reif, R.; Liffers, M.; Forrester, N.; Peal, K. Lithium Battery Safety. Environmental Health and Safety. 2018. Available online:
https://www.ehs.washington.edu/resource/lithium-battery-safety-732 (accessed on 20 February 2021).
38. Fotouhi, A.; Auger, D.J.; Cleaver, T.; Shateri, N.; Propp, K.; Longo, S. Influence of battery capacity on performance of an
electric vehicle fleet. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and Applications
(ICRERA), Birmingham, UK, 23–26 November 2016; pp. 928–933. [CrossRef]
39. Heacock, D.; Freeman, D. Capacity monitoring in advanced battery chemistries. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Battery
Conference on Applications and Advances, Long Beach, CA, USA, 6 August 2002; pp. 185–191.
40. Pollet, B.G.; Staffell, I.; Shang, J.L. Current status of hybrid, battery and fuel cell electric vehicles: From electrochemistry to market
prospects. Electrochim. Acta 2012, 84, 235–249. [CrossRef]
41. Han, W.; Zou, C.; Zhou, C.; Zhang, L. Estimation of Cell SOC Evolution and System Performance in Module-Based Battery
Charge Equalization Systems. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2019, 10, 4717–4728. [CrossRef]
42. Berjoza, D.; Jurgena, I. Influence of batteries weight on electric automobile performance. Eng. Rural Dev. 2017, 16, 1388–1394.
[CrossRef]
43. Reński, A.; National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Investigation of the Influence of the Centre of Gravity Position on
the Course of Vehicle Rollover. In Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles
(ESV) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Gothenburg, Sweden, 8–11 June 2015; pp. 8–11.
44. Doumiati, M.; Victorino, A.; Charara, A.; Lechner, D. Lateral load transfer and normal forces estimation for vehicle safety:
Experimental test. Veh. Syst. Dyn. 2009, 47, 1511–1533. [CrossRef]
45. Berjoza, D.; Jurgena, I. Effects of change in the weight of electric vehicles on their performance characteristics. Agron. Res. 2017,
15, 952–963.
46. Becker, J.; Nemeth, T.; Wegmann, R.; Sauer, D.U. Dimensioning and Optimization of Hybrid Li-Ion Battery Systems for EVs.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2018, 9, 19. [CrossRef]
47. Van Vliet, O.; Brouwer, A.S.; Kuramochi, T.; Broek, M.V.D.; Faaij, A. Energy use, cost and CO2 emissions of electric cars. J. Power
Source 2011, 196, 2298–2310. [CrossRef]
48. Ribeiro, B.; Brito, F.; Martins, J. A Survey on Electric/Hybrid Vehicles. In SAE Technical Paper Series; SAE: Warrendale, PA, USA,
2010. [CrossRef]
49. Trattnig, G.; Leitgeb, W. Automotive Battery Technology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014.
50. Yang, S.; Lu, Y.; Li, S. An overview on vehicle dynamics. Int. J. Dyn. Control. 2013, 1, 385–395. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 1939 24 of 24

51. Zeng, B.; Liu, X.; Zhang, Y. The Structure Optimization Analysis of Electric Vehicle in Small Offset Rear End Collision. Procedia
Eng. 2016, 137, 103–108.
52. Kong, L.; Li, C.; Jiang, J.; Pecht, M.G. Li-Ion Battery Fire Hazards and Safety Strategies. Energies 2018, 11, 2191. [CrossRef]
53. Groupe Bolloré. Blue Solutions Business Report. 2013. Available online: https://www.blue-solutions.com/en/blue-solutions/
investissors/informations-reglementees/ (accessed on 20 February 2021).
54. Miri, I.; Fotouhi, A.; Ewin, N. Electric vehicle energy consumption modelling and estimation—A case study. Int. J. Energy Res.
2021, 45, 501–520. [CrossRef]
55. BMW Group. Technical Specifications for the BMW i3 (94Ah), Valid from 07/2016. 19–20 (2016). Available online: https:
//www.press.bmwgroup.com/global/article/search/tag:84,136/ (accessed on 20 February 2021).
56. Schneider, J.; Heubner, A.; Reinshagen, H. Patent Application Publication Safety device for arrangement in a battery cell of a
Lithium-Ion Battery, Lithium-Ion Battery cell with safety device. U.S. Patent Application 14/057,323, 24 April 2014.