Further Reading

The model behind PRV-Sizing is deliberately narrow. These studies cover the parts of the problem it leaves out, and they are the sources cited elsewhere in this documentation.

Pack Venting and Valve Dynamics

Wang, P., Liu, L., Xu, C., Liu, Y., Zheng, T., Liu, L., Li, J., Guan, D., Jiang, F., Feng, X., Ouyang, M. (2026). A multiphysics study on venting safety in battery energy storage systems: from cell venting to energy storage station explosion hazards. Energy, 344, 139870. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2025.139870

A coupled model spanning cell gas generation, in-pack flow, valve mechanics, and gas dispersion and combustion at station level, validated against valve characterisation and pack thermal runaway tests.

Relevant to this documentation for three things. It separates the cell safety vent from the pack relief valve explicitly, as two devices with opposite reset behaviour. It derives the pressure hysteresis of a spring valve from a force balance on the plug, showing that the opening pressure is necessarily higher than the closing pressure. And it demonstrates the intermittent venting that follows when the gas generation rate is low enough for the valve to reseat mid-event.

Read it if you need the chain beyond the valve outlet, which PRV-Sizing does not model.

Relief Valve Design and Real Valve Limitations

Song, Y., Hou, J., Lyu, N., Luo, X., Ma, J., Chen, S., Wu, P., Jiang, X., Jin, Y. (2024). Electric-controlled pressure relief valve for enhanced safety in liquid-cooled lithium-ion battery packs. Journal of Energy Chemistry, 90, 98–109. doi:10.1016/j.jechem.2023.11.007

An experimental and numerical study of relief valves on sealed liquid-cooled packs, including an overcharge test on a commercial pack that ended in explosion, and a numerical study of how valve size and mounting position affect relief effectiveness.

Relevant here for two findings that bound what any flow curve based model can tell you. Vaporised electrolyte can be blocked by the microporous breathing membrane rather than passing through it, because the droplets are larger than the pore structure, so the real relief path may perform worse than its clean flow curve. And the opening pressure cannot simply be set low to improve response, since a setpoint close to the everyday pressure swing invites spurious actuation and lets dust and water into the pack.

Read it if you are assessing whether a candidate valve will behave in service the way its datasheet curve suggests.

How These Sources Are Used Here

Both papers inform the physical reasoning on PRV Behaviour and Assumptions and Limits. Neither describes the PRV-Sizing implementation, and neither endorses this tool.

If you know of work that would improve this documentation, please send it to support@thermosketch.com.