How do you Calculate Ampacity of a Conductor Geometry?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the ampacity of a nickel strip, emphasizing the theoretical understanding of the concept rather than practical application. Ampacity is defined as the maximum current a conductor can handle before overheating, and it is noted that ampacity tables may not include all conductors. Key points include the realization that ampacity does not depend on the conductor's length, as the rate of heat production and heat loss are proportional to the surface area. The conversation also highlights the importance of factors such as ambient temperature and the acceptable overheating temperature for nickel. The calculations presented involve various equations to derive the ampacity, with a focus on ensuring dimensional consistency and understanding heat transfer principles.
  • #51
erobz said:
That all looks reasonable to me, good job!
Thanks for your help through this process! Defiantly learned a lot through it. Seems like the generic equation is:

$$I = \sqrt{\frac{T_{1} - T_{\infty}}{R\sum_{}^{} R_{T}}}$$

Where R is the resistance of the strip, and RT is the thermal resistance.

Once conceptual question I have is shown in the example below:
1738551960937.png

Assume that the battery pack contains many nickel strips, connecting cells in series and parallel. The overall current used from the pack is ##I_{A}##. All series connections experience the full ##I_{A}## current. Items in series experience the same current. If the series connections are made up of more than one piece of nickel strip, but of same width and thickness connections, perhaps of different length, ##L_{1}## and ##L_{2}##, are in the same box discussed above. Each of the two strips see ##I_{A}##.

Now as far as the total heat transferred into the air within the box, do I need to consider the total volume of "all" strips experiencing ##I_{A}##, since each strip contributes to the overall heat transfer to air within the box, even though it's the same current ##I_{A}##? Meaning do the presence of additional separate nickel strips experiencing the same current, impact the overall current that can be handled by each individual separate strip?

One additional conceptual question I have, I see that ##h## is dependent on the orientation. But how is this impacted for my strip for the heat transferred from the strip to the air in the box? So say for example while my battery box is at rest on a table, the strip is perfectly perpendicular to the table and is considered vertical. If I rotate the entire box (and therefore the strip as well) so that it is now horizontal, from my perspective outside of the box, the strip is now horizontal. However from the perspective relative to the air within the box, the strip is still vertical and hasn't changed orientation, and I should still consider it as vertical? Meaning vertical and horizontal is from relative to what perspective? Maybe I'm just confusing this and making it more complicated. Certainly if I rotate a strip in ambient air from vertical to horizontal, the strip is now horizontal. But if I'm not considering open ambient air in the atmosphere, but air within a container, and the whole container and therefore the air within it rotates with the strip, I have a slightly different situation, and I'm not sure if I need to take into consideration perspective?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
Your image shows two strips of batteries, each strip has the batteries in parallel.

Now, if the batteries are supplying (or consuming) a current, the current in the strip will vary along its length because each battery is sharing the current load.

Cheers,
Tom
 
  • #53
Tom.G said:
Your image shows two strips of batteries, each strip has the batteries in parallel.

Now, if the batteries are supplying (or consuming) a current, the current in the strip will vary along its length because each battery is sharing the current load.

Cheers,
Tom
Sorry for not showing this properly.

One one side you have something like this. On the other something like shown in the other figure. Theoretical thought exercise only here to understand concepts:

1738553953086.png
1738554129783.png

Assume that the copper bus bar in the second figure is nickel. This gives me a 5P2S pack.
The second image shows that ##I_{A}## would get divided up amongst the total surface area of all the strips connected the positive connections to the negative connections, creating the series and parallel connections.

I see your point here though. At BAT + and BAT - I'm seeing the full current, however as you go down the length of the strip, you would be seeing ##I_{A}## drop off assuming each cell contribute equally, ##\frac{1}{5}##. I suppose you could vary the length, width and thickness somehow, maybe by "stacking" identical additional strips on top of each Strip 1 and Strip 2, to increase the thickness. I need to figure out how increasing the thickness impacts current carrying abilities.

My theoretical question I guess though is that does the presence of additional physically separate nickel strips within the box impact the current carrying capability of each individual strip?

Certainly if I take heat transfer via radiation into consideration, absolutely! But estimating this seems difficult. I don't know if I can negate radiation effects by insulating with Kapton tape? I guess even if I disregard radiation, does the presence of other strips impact the current carrying capability of other strips, due to more convection into the air within the box? Even though it's still the same maximum current going through the pack?
 
  • #54
BuddyBoy said:
I guess even if I disregard radiation, does the presence of other strips impact the current carrying capability of other strips, due to more convection into the air within the box? Even though it's still the same maximum current going through the pack?
Why are you asking this question? For mechanical reasons the strips that connect cells or batteries together are of such a size that their resistance is negligible in comparison with the internal resistance of the cells: battery packs heat up because of battery chemistry, not conductor resistivity.
 
  • #55
BuddyBoy said:
Thanks for your help through this process! Defiantly learned a lot through it. Seems like the generic equation is:

$$I = \sqrt{\frac{T_{1} - T_{\infty}}{R\sum_{}^{} R_{T}}}$$

Where R is the resistance of the strip, and RT is the thermal resistance.
I wouldn't say that its a generic or general solution. We have implicitly made assumptions specific to the problem that are not generally true. For instance, if there was a wall that was thicker than another the inside temperature on that wall is different than the others (your solution assumes all interior wall at ##T_3## reasonable approximation perhaps - but I think none the less not general, or generic), different convection coefficients changes the temps ,having different wall temps (if significant) can introduce radiation...another complication. At best I think you have an outline for how might proceed to find a "more general" solution. The stuff you find in intro textbooks is "plane walls" for a reason. Fundamentally you are just going to have to work from principles. I just don't want you to start confidently overapplying it.

I was trying to help you get somewhere on it, but also don't want to try and translate a course on heat/mass transfer just so you can solve this(I think you have some very deep goals). Are you taking this course in college?
 
Last edited:
  • #56
Thanks for the responses!
pbuk said:
Why are you asking this question? For mechanical reasons the strips that connect cells or batteries together are of such a size that their resistance is negligible in comparison with the internal resistance of the cells: battery packs heat up because of battery chemistry, not conductor resistivity.
I'm asking this question, to attempt to apply a more practical application of the theoretical concepts learned from the oversimplified question asked, of how to theoretically calculate how much current can go through a strip of nickel strip in a battery pack in order to maintain a certain surface temperature.

Nickel strips are used in battery packs. Different thicknesses, widths, and lengths are available. But how do you know which dimensions to use if you wish your battery pack to output current ##I##, if the rest of the battery pack is built properly (i.e., properly rated batteries and BMS).

I've learned good things so far from the oversimplified question originally asked, of just a nickel strip sitting in a box:
  1. A common misconception (from the concepts and equations learned from this topic) is that length has no effect on the current carrying capability. This appears to be NOT true.
  2. A common misconception is that doubling the width or thickness doubles the current carrying capability. This appears to be NOT true.
  3. Even the orientation of the strip, seems to have an impact on the current carrying capability.
Certainly though, if you use a nickel strip to small in dimensions, yes it will carry the current, but it will get to hot, past the operating temperature ratings of the cells. If you want to stay under the operating temperature of the cells, how do you know what dimension of nickel to use?

Well thinking about this in greater detail here... If the cell is rated to output current ##I## under the operating temperature ##T_{Cell}##. Then the cell can output ##I##, no problem. However, if the nickel strip that it is connected to is not properly sized, the nickel stirp will heat up, possibly past ##T_{Cell}##. Then conduction between the strip and the cell will occur, and the cell could heat up past ##T_{Cell}##. So if I can figure out the size of the nickel strip at current ##I## at a temperature under ##T_{Cell}## (plus a safety margin), then there is no need to worry about the cell getting to ##T_{Cell}##.

Any ideas?
erobz said:
I wouldn't say that its a generic or general solution. We have implicitly made assumptions specific to the problem that are not generally true. For instance, if there was a wall that was thicker than another the inside temperature on that wall is different than the others (your solution assumes all interior wall at ##T_3## reasonable approximation perhaps - but I think none the less not general, or generic), different convection coefficients changes the temps ,having different wall temps (if significant) can introduce radiation...another complication. At best I think you have an outline for how might proceed to find a "more general" solution. The stuff you find in intro textbooks is "plane walls" for a reason. Fundamentally you are just going to have to work from principles. I just don't want you to start confidently overapplying it.

I was trying to help you get somewhere on it, but also don't want to try and translate a course on heat/mass transfer just so you can solve this(I think you have some very deep goals). Are you taking this course in college?
Thanks for pointing the assumptions. They make sense. This isn't for a college course, just trying to understand a theoretical practical problem.

I'm thinking more and more that perhaps this problem cannot be solved, and experimental data is required? I suppose this is possible, but this seems like a very time consuming process. So I would like to at least think there's a way to calculate the dimensions given desired current.
 
  • #57
BuddyBoy said:
I'm asking this question, to attempt to apply a more practical application of the theoretical concepts learned from the oversimplified question asked, of how to theoretically calculate how much current can go through a strip of nickel strip in a battery pack in order to maintain a certain surface temperature.
In almost all practical applications, surface temperature is not a design limitation. Any nickel strip of sufficient dimensions to satisfy the mechanical requirements (mainly the connections to the individual cells) will have negligible resistivity. To understand this better, obtain some battery packs with nickel strip connections and measure them.

BuddyBoy said:
A common misconception (from the concepts and equations learned from this topic) is that length has no effect on the current carrying capability. This appears to be NOT true.
This is not a misconception. Your calculations depend on length because you are assuming heat dissipation from the ends of the conductor however in any application where ampacity is relevant the ends of the conductor are (i) connected to something so unable to dissipate heat; and (ii) negligible compared to the length of the conductor.

BuddyBoy said:
A common misconception is that doubling the width or thickness doubles the current carrying capability.
Do you have any evidence that this is a common misconception?

BuddyBoy said:
Even the orientation of the strip, seems to have an impact on the current carrying capability.
Yes, so when we are concerned with ampacity and convection is a significant factor in heat dissipation (e.g. in a "clipped direct" fixing as used in UK consumer wiring tables), vertical orientation is assumed. These tables are also based on a standard configuration of conductors (e.g. flat twin and earth) and insulation so cannot be derived by calculations on an isolated conductor in free air.

BuddyBoy said:
Certainly though, if you use a nickel strip to small in dimensions, yes it will carry the current, but it will get to hot, past the operating temperature ratings of the cells. If you want to stay under the operating temperature of the cells, how do you know what dimension of nickel to use?
Any dimension of nickel strip that you can fix mechanically to the cells will have negligible resistance.
 
  • #58
pbuk said:
In almost all practical applications, surface temperature is not a design limitation. Any nickel strip of sufficient dimensions to satisfy the mechanical requirements (mainly the connections to the individual cells) will have negligible resistivity. To understand this better, obtain some battery packs with nickel strip connections and measure them.


This is not a misconception. Your calculations depend on length because you are assuming heat dissipation from the ends of the conductor however in any application where ampacity is relevant the ends of the conductor are (i) connected to something so unable to dissipate heat; and (ii) negligible compared to the length of the conductor.


Do you have any evidence that this is a common misconception?


Yes, so when we are concerned with ampacity and convection is a significant factor in heat dissipation (e.g. in a "clipped direct" fixing as used in UK consumer wiring tables), vertical orientation is assumed. These tables are also based on a standard configuration of conductors (e.g. flat twin and earth) and insulation so cannot be derived by calculations on an isolated conductor in free air.


Any dimension of nickel strip that you can fix mechanically to the cells will have negligible resistance.
Hey thanks. I've seen that commercial power tool battery packs:
1738718588141.png

Appears to use at most 0.2 mm thick nickel, and very uncommon I have seen 0.3 mm thick. Appears to be about 10 mm wide or so. I'll also note that the majority of he nickel is in the "vertical" position with regards to the LW and Lt surface areas. If you rotate the battery pack horizontally, and the air within it, I'm not sure if the plates are still considered "vertical".

I'm not so sure I understand the concept that "any" dimension strip will work. Could you help me understand this a bit better? I think you might be right, but I'm struggling a bit to understand.

$$P = I^{2}R$$

So if ##R## is small so will be the "heat" generated, ##P## in terms of watts. However at some point as the current increases, I would imagine ##P## would be so large that the surface temperature of the nickel strip would get to hot, and it could eventually reach the maximum operating temperature of the cell? I'm not sure if there's a way to determine what this ##P## value is?

I see that if something else was connected to the Wt surface areas, than there is no conduction from that surface area. If you consider the Wt surface areas to be small, than the L term cancels out.

Sorry, just my thoughts that I think some people think "stacking" nickel helps much.

I wisht there was an ampacity table for nickel, given dimensions. However every table I see has different values! So I don't know which table to trust, or if it is experimentally obtained data only, and cannot be calculated?

I think calculating the temperature surface of a nickel strip "floating" in ambient area, given the dimensions, and ambient temperature, can be calculated. Could even calculate what would be if you insulate it.

At the very least we can say based on
$$I = \sqrt{\frac{T_{1} - T_{\infty}}{R*R_{T}}}$$
That the ##R_{T}## term is larger for when it is stored within a battery box, over ambient air. And because
$$I \alpha \frac{1}{\sqrt{R_{T}}}$$
So as ##R_{T}## gets larger ##I## gets smaller
So you can find the current given the dimensions, ambient temperature, desired surface temperature. Then you can say that the actual number for when it's in a battery box needs to be smaller than this. But by how much is unknown.

Some other values you would know when designing a battery pack:
Trying to think about other details here. You can measure the internal resistance of each cell. You can estimate how much nickel strip you are using and it's resistance. But you wouldn't know the resistance of the BMS. But you can also simply use a multimeter on the connector on the outside of the battery box enclosure and measure the internal resistance of the battery pack as a whole. Then the difference would give you resistance of the BMS.

So if you measure the internal resistance of the battery pack as whole from outside of the box, and you know the current you want to drain from it.

$$P = I^{2}R$$

You can know the total power consumed by the battery pack from it's internal resistance. But I'm not sure if this is useful.
 
  • #59
BuddyBoy said:
Hey thanks. I've seen that commercial power tool battery packs:
View attachment 356849
Appears to use at most 0.2 mm thick nickel, and very uncommon I have seen 0.3 mm thick. Appears to be about 10 mm wide or so.
So what is the cross-sectional area, in metres? Have you looked up the resistivity of nickel? If so, what is the resistance of, say, a strip 20cm long? What is the maximum current that you will draw from the battery pack? And what therefore will be the power that the strip needs to dissipate?

BuddyBoy said:
I'll also note that the majority of he nickel is in the "vertical" position with regards to the LW and Lt surface areas. If you rotate the battery pack horizontally, and the air within it, I'm not sure if the plates are still considered "vertical".
You have already been told that orientation of the strip is only relevant if heat loss by convection is significant. Do you think there is any convection inside the battery pack?

BuddyBoy said:
But you can also simply use a multimeter on the connector on the outside of the battery box enclosure and measure the internal resistance of the battery pack as a whole.
No, you cannot measure the internal resistance of a battery with a multimeter.

I think you should stop thinking about designing battery packs and learn some electronics.
 
  • Like
Likes Steve4Physics, Averagesupernova, SammyS and 1 other person
  • #60
BuddyBoy said:
You can know the total power consumed by the battery pack from it's internal resistance. But I'm not sure if this is useful.
Note that a battery's eletrolytes have electrical resistance - this is the main source of a battery's internal heating when current flows. Note that some of this heat will be thermally conducted to any nickel strips, making them hotter. This could be a larger effect than Ohmic heating from current passing through the strips.

The type of ampacity calculation you are considering does not take this into account.
 
  • #61
pbuk said:
So what is the cross-sectional area, in metres? Have you looked up the resistivity of nickel? If so, what is the resistance of, say, a strip 20cm long? What is the maximum current that you will draw from the battery pack? And what therefore will be the power that the strip needs to dissipate?


You have already been told that orientation of the strip is only relevant if heat loss by convection is significant. Do you think there is any convection inside the battery pack?


No, you cannot measure the internal resistance of a battery with a multimeter.

I think you should stop thinking about designing battery packs and learn some electronics.
Finding the power dissipated in a strip is easy. But I am wondering how many Watts dissipated by the strip is considered "to much" because of the amount of heat?

Yea I do think there is some convection in the battery pack. There's not much for an air gap, but it is still present. I wanted as high fidelity as possible before making simplifications and assuming something is about zero.

There are different BMSs available, which have different continuous discharge currents supported, assuming the selected cells can support it. Some as low as 20 A, some nearly double that. Regardless finding cells to meet these needs is easy. But I'm struggling with trying to figure out what dimensions of nickel is considered insignificant?

I'm ok with considering it insignificant. But how many watts crossed the line from insignificant to significant?

So let's say at 20 A, 63 mm x 10 mm x 0.1 mm, this would give me, this would give me 1.76 W. At how many watts dissipated in a single strip should I be concerned that my strip is to small? This is just what the numbers gave, and part of my question if it is to much watts. So I'm not suggesting anyone actually send this much current through a strip this size. Theoretical only, and is the whole point of my question, and trying to understand the concepts here of how much power dissipated in a strip is considered to much.

Thanks for the info on internal resistance and cells heating up.

Thanks for all the help, greatly appreciated!!
 
  • #62
UPDATE: Like others have mentioned, I completely disregard the heat transfer from to/from the cell. I may been overthinking this problem.

So for a randomly chosen 21700 cell. 50S, in a 3P5S pack, continuous discharge from the pack of ##30 A##.
1738898140966.png

The temperature of the strip ##T_{S}## is greater than the temperature of the cell ##T_{C}##, and the maximum operating temperature of the cell of ##60\;C##.

The surface temperature of the cell at ##10 A## (30/3, it's a 3P pack) from the graph is ##51\;C##. We do not want the surface temperature of the strip to get to ##60\;C## because then heat will transfer from the strip to the cells, eventually warming up the cells to their maximum operating temperature.

Assume that the length of the strip is ##63 mm## to allow for three cells to be connected.

The thermal conductivity of most 21700 cells is generically speaking between ##12.6 \frac{W}{m\;C}## and ##16.7 \frac{W}{m\;C}##

The resistivity of nickel is approximately ##6.99*10^{-8} \Omega\;m## or ##6.99*10^{-8} \Omega\;m*\frac{1}{10^{3}}\;\frac{m}{mm} = 6.99*10^{-11} \Omega\;mm##

##I^{2} \frac{\rho\;L_{S}}{Wt} = 3\frac{K_{C}}{L_{C}}\pi\;r^{2}(T_{S} - T_{C})##
##\frac{1}{Wt} = \frac{1}{\rho\;L_{S}I^{2}}3\frac{K_{C}}{L_{C}}\pi\;r^{2}(T_{S} - T_{C})##
##Wt = \frac{\rho\;L_{S}I^{2}L_{C}}{3K_{C}\pi\;r^{2}(T_{S}-T_{C})}##
##Wt = \frac{(6.99*10^{-11} \Omega\;mm)\;(63 mm)(30 A)^{2}(70 mm)}{3(12.6 \frac{W}{m\;C})\pi\;(21 mm)^{2}(60 C- 51 C)} \frac{W}{A^{2}\Omega}##
##Wt = \frac{(6.99*10^{-11} mm)\;(63)(30)^{2}(70)}{3(12.6 \frac{1}{m})\pi\;(21)^{2}(60 - 51)}##
##Wt = \frac{(6.99*10^{-11})\;(63)(30)^{2}(70)}{3(12.6)\pi\;(21)^{2}(60 - 51)} m*mm*(10^{3} \frac{mm}{m})##
##Wt = \frac{(6.99*10^{-11})\;(63)(30)^{2}(70)}{3(12.6)\pi\;(21)^{2}(60 - 51)}(10^{3}) mm^{2}##

So if I assume 0.1 mm for thickness, I get a width of 5.88621 * 10 ^(-6) mm

Seems like what others suggest that "any" dimension would work. But I'm just trying to confirm at this point that this approach is correct? I don't see what's wrong with it at the moment.

Again just theoretical, it's just what the numbers gave me. Trying to confirm if my approach based on the concepts is correct. The number is in question, and could be wrong.
 
  • #63
BuddyBoy said:
I may been overthinking this problem.
Ya think?
 
  • #64
pbuk said:
Ya think?
Perhaps, but I'm not sure that my logic in post number 62 holds water? I'm not sure that I can assume the temperature of the strip would be 60 deg C, while the temperature of the cell is 51 deg C? Because this would result in heat transfer occurring between the strip and cell. If we want the cells to be the limitation, than we want the strip to be a colder temperature than the cell. So I have to find a way to find the resistance of the strip, such that heat transfer occurs between the cell and strip, as opposed to the other way around.

Like you had mentioned, I should consider the cells being the limitation factor, and not the strips. Meaning that the cells should be hotter than the strips.

Problem Statement:
Determine the dimensions of a nickel strip required to maintain ##30 A##, such that the randomly selected 21700 cells, Samsung 50S, within a battery box. Size the strip such that the cells are the limitation, and not the strip. Meaning that the cells maintain a higher temperature than the strip. Assume that cells are identical, with identical internal resistances ##r_{int}##. Each individual cell is at the same temperature ##T_{C}## when drawing the same current, therefore there is no heat transfer in between each cell. Assume that the ambient air conditions ##T_{\infty} = 100\;deg\;F##. 21700 cells have a diameter of ##21 mm##. Assume that insulation is placed around the nickel strip, such that it is in contact with the side walls of the battery box. This assumption limits convection of the stirp to near zero, and can be considered insignificant. Test data shows that the temperature of this particular cell model is ##51\;deg\;C## at ##10 A##. Find a generic formula with variables.

1738988952871.png

1738988716711.png

1738988731465.png

Heat transfer from cells to strip:
$$(\frac{I}{3})^{2}\;r_{int} + (\frac{I}{3})^{2}\;r_{int} + (\frac{I}{3})^{2}\;r_{int} = \frac{k_{S}}{t_{S}}A_{C}(T_{C} - T_{S}) + \frac{k_{S}}{t_{S}}A_{C}(T_{C} - T_{S}) + \frac{k_{S}}{t_{S}}A_{C}(T_{C} - T_{S})$$
$$3(\frac{I^{2}}{9})r_{int} =3\frac{k_{S}}{t_{S}}A_{C}(T_{C} - T_{S})$$
$$\frac{1}{3}I^{2}r_{int} =3\frac{k_{S}}{t_{S}}A_{C}(T_{C} - T_{S})$$
Solving for ##T_{C} - T_{S}##:
$$T_{C} - T_{S} = \frac{1}{3}I^{2}r_{int}\frac{1}{3}\frac{t_{S}}{k_{S}}\frac{1}{A_{C}}$$
$$T_{C} - T_{S} = \frac{I^{2}\;r_{int}\;t_{S}}{9k_{S}\;A_{C}}$$

Heat transfer from strip to insulation:
$$\frac{1}{3}I^{2}r_{int} + I^{2}R = \frac{k_{I}}{t_{I}}A_{S}(T_{S} - T_{I})$$
$$I^{2}(\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R) = \frac{k_{I}}{t_{I}}A_{S}(T_{S} - T_{I})$$
Solving for ##T_{S} - T_{I}##:
$$T_{S} - T_{I} = (\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)\frac{t_{I}I^{2}}{k_{I}A_{S}}$$

Heat transfer from insulation to box:
$$I^{2}(\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R) = \frac{k_{B}}{t_{B}}A_{I}(T_{I} - T_{B})$$
Solving for ##T_{I} - T_{B}##:
$$T_{I} - T_{B} = (\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)\frac{t_{B}I^{2}}{k_{B}A_{I}}$$

Heat transfer from box to ambient air:
$$I^{2}(\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R) =(T_{B} - T_{\infty})\sum_{i=1}^n h_{i}*A_{i}$$
Solve for ##T_{B} - T_{\infty}##:
$$(T_{B} - T_{\infty}) = \frac{I^{2}(\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)}{\sum_{i=1}^n h_{i}*A_{i}}$$

Solve for ##T_{C} - T_{\infty}##:
$$T_{C} - T_{\infty} = T_{C} - T_{S} + T_{S} - T_{I} + T_{I} - T_{B} + T_{B} - T_{\infty}$$
$$T_{C} - T_{\infty} = \frac{I^{2}\;r_{int}\;t_{S}}{9k_{S}\;A_{C}} + (\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)\frac{t_{I}I^{2}}{k_{I}A_{S}} + (\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)\frac{t_{B}I^{2}}{k_{B}A_{I}} + \frac{I^{2}(\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)}{\sum_{i=1}^n h_{i}*A_{i}}$$
$$T_{C} - T_{\infty} = I^{2}(\frac{\;r_{int}\;t_{S}}{9k_{S}\;A_{C}} + (\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)(\frac{t_{I}}{k_{I}A_{S}} + \frac{t_{B}}{k_{B}A_{I}} + \frac{1}{\sum_{i=1}^n h_{i}*A_{i}}))$$
Now solve for ##R##:
$$\frac{T_{C} - T_{\infty}}{I^{2}} = \frac{\;r_{int}\;t_{S}}{9k_{S}\;A_{C}} + (\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)(\frac{t_{I}}{k_{I}A_{S}} + \frac{t_{B}}{k_{B}A_{I}} + \frac{1}{\sum_{i=1}^n h_{i}*A_{i}})$$
$$\frac{T_{C} - T_{\infty}}{I^{2}} - \frac{\;r_{int}\;t_{S}}{9k_{S}\;A_{C}} = (\frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R)(\frac{t_{I}}{k_{I}A_{S}} + \frac{t_{B}}{k_{B}A_{I}} + \frac{1}{\sum_{i=1}^n h_{i}*A_{i}})$$
$$\frac{\frac{T_{C} - T_{\infty}}{I^{2}} - \frac{\;r_{int}\;t_{S}}{9k_{S}\;A_{C}}}{\frac{t_{I}}{k_{I}A_{S}} + \frac{t_{B}}{k_{B}A_{I}} + \frac{1}{\sum_{i=1}^n h_{i}*A_{i}}} = \frac{1}{3}r_{int} + R$$
$$R = \frac{\frac{T_{C} - T_{\infty}}{I^{2}} - \frac{\;r_{int}\;t_{S}}{9k_{S}\;A_{C}}}{\frac{t_{I}}{k_{I}A_{S}} + \frac{t_{B}}{k_{B}A_{I}} + \frac{1}{\sum_{i=1}^n h_{i}*A_{i}}} - \frac{1}{3}r_{int}$$

Where:
##R## is the resistance of the strip
##T_{C}## is the temperature of the conductor
##T_{\infty}## is the temperature of the ambient air conditions
##I## is the current going through the nickel strip
##r_{int}## is the internal resistance of the cell
##t_{S}## is the thickness of the nickel strip
##k_{S}## is the thermal conductivity of the nickel strip
##A_{C}## is the surface area that the cell is in contact with the strip
##t_{I}## is the thickness of the insulation
##k_{I}## is the thermal conductivity of the insulation
##A_{S}## is the surface area that the strip is in contact with the insulation
##t_{B}## is the thickness of the box wall
##k_{B}## is the thermal conductivity of the box
##A_{I}## is the surface area that the insulation is contact with the box
##h_{i}## is the heat transfer coefficient for surface area ##i## for the box to the ambient air
##A_{i}## is the surface area ##i## of the box in contact with ambient air

Now that I know ##R## I can select an appropriately dimensioned strip that has this resistance.

Does this look better? I'm not making any assumptions about the temperature of the strip ##T_{S}##, other than that it is less than the temperature of the cell ##T_{C}##, which is what, to indicate that the cells are the limitation and not the strip. I don't need to find ##T_{S}## in this method. I'm not sure if my heat transfer for the strip to insulation is correct?

Thanks for all the help! I'm ok accepting that "any" dimensioned strip will work, but I just want to understand why it's insignificant. If it is insignificant, what is the exact point in which it does become significant? Certainly there is a boundary point where I most consider the dimensions. I wonder what this point is and how to find it out.
 
  • #65
This may have been a whole simpler that I had thought! The only problem is that the answer I'm getting below seems to be independent of the current, and only dependent on the internal resistance. This is very confusing to me. See below.

So if the cells are supposed to be the limiting factor, than the at the very worse case scenario, the cells are to be the same temperature as the strip. There would be no heat transfer between the cells and the strip.

The heat transfer from the cells to the strip is
$$\frac{1}{3}I^{2}r_{int}$$
See the post above for where I derived it.

The heat transferred from the strip to the cells is
$$I^{2}R$$

So if the cells are at the same temperature as the strip, than the heat transferred between the objects should be identical.
$$\frac{1}{3}I^{2}r_{int} = I^{2}R$$
Solve for ##R##:
$$R = \frac{1}{3}r_{int}$$
$$\frac{\rho\;L}{Wt} = \frac{1}{3}r_{int}$$
$$\frac{Wt}{\rho\;L} = \frac{3}{r_{int}}$$
$$Wt = \frac{3\rho\;L}{\;r_{int}}$$

So for Samsung 50S, ##r_{int} <= 14 m\Omega##. So I will just take the value of ##14 m\Omega## for now. But understanding that if ##r_{int}## gets smaller, than my ##Wt## quantity needs to be larger. Assuming a nickel strip that is ##0.1 mm## thick and ##63 mm## long. How wide of a strip do I need?

$$W = \frac{3\rho\;L}{\;r_{int}t}$$
$$W = \frac{3(6.99*10^{-8}\;\Omega\;m)(10^{3}\;\frac{mm}{m})(63\;mm)}{(14\;m\Omega)(\frac{1}{10^{3}}\;\frac{\Omega}{m\Omega})(0.1\;mm)} = 9.4365\;mm$$

So per this a 0.1 mm x 9.4365 mm x 63 mm long nickel strip can handle 30 A when it's connected to three cells that have an internal resistance of 14 mOhm.

All theoretical here, this is just what the numbers gave me, and seems incorrect to me. The formula I'm getting is independent of the current, which seems wrong to me. But I'm not seeing what's wrong with this approach though.

Thanks for any help!
 
Back
Top