From cell to battery pack: a structural revolution centered on “module-free” design
time：2026-07-31
In the development history of power battery, "module" was once an indispensable middle-level manager. It is like a dedicated butler who packages, fixes, and manages dozens of cell and then sends them to battery pack for unified scheduling. However, the manager himself consumes space, weight and cost-Module Framework, side panels, connectors and fixed structures, nested layer by layer, and the actual space utilization rate of cell is less than 50%. In the eyes of engineers who gather new energy sources, modules have evolved from "necessary evil" to "redundancy that must be removed. A structural revolution about "demodule" is quietly reshaping the underlying logic of power batteries.
I. "original sin" of Module: invisible consumption of space, weight and cost
to understand the necessity of de-module, we must first see the "cost bill" of the module ".
In the traditional "cell-module-battery pack" three-level architecture, the energy density of a cell piece may reach 250Wh/kg, but after the module is loaded, the energy density of the module drops sharply to about 180Wh/kg, after another battery pack is loaded, the energy density of the system drops further to 140-160Wh/kg. Behind the layer-by-layer attenuation is the "invisible consumption" of the module structure-the frame accounts for 15%, the connector accounts for 8%, and the insulation material accounts for 5%, plus the gap reserved for heat dissipation and maintenance, the actual volume utilization rate of cell is less than 55%.
2. CTP 1.0 to 3.0: The Evolution trilogy of new energy sources
the CTP(Cell to Pack) technology that gathers new energy has undergone three iterative transitions.
CTP 1.0: module slimming. The module concept is retained, but the frame structure is greatly simplified, the upper cover and side plate of the module are canceled, and cell are directly bonded into groups through structural adhesive. The space utilization rate increased from 50% to 65%, and the number of parts decreased by 25%. This is the first test of "de-modular" by new energy sources, which verifies the feasibility of the process.
CTP 2.0: module dies. Completely cancel the module level and integrate cell directly into the battery pack box. Energy-gathering New Energy has developed a "big module alternative"-fixing hundreds of cell into a whole through structural adhesive and straps, and then loading them into the box. The BMS sampling harness is rearranged and upgraded from module-level sampling to electrical the rate of pillow inner sampling. The space utilization rate exceeded 70%, and the system energy density reached 180Wh/kg.
CTP 3.0: System refactoring. This is the current mass production plan of energy gathering new energy. Cell is no longer just "loaded" the box, but deeply coupled with the box structure-cell itself becomes a part of the structural parts and participates in carrying the vehicle load. Honeycomb reinforcement network is adopted inside the box, cell array is interlaced with reinforcement, and the stiffness-weight ratio is increased by 40%. The space utilization rate reaches more than 75%, the energy density of the system exceeds 200Wh/kg, and the number of parts is reduced by 45% compared with the traditional scheme.
III. Technical challenges: three challenges behind de-module
de-module is not a simple "dismantling framework", but a comprehensive reconstruction of materials, processes and systems.
Structural fixation: from mechanical restraint to material bonding. After the module framework is removed, the fixing of cell depends entirely on the structural adhesive. The new energy accumulation Energy has developed a two-component polyurethane structural adhesive with shear strength ≥ 10MPa, and keeps the elastic modulus stable in the cell expansion cycle to avoid stress concentration. The gluing process is upgraded from "line coating" to "surface coating", and the thickness of the adhesive layer is controlled at 0.3-0.5mm, which not only ensures the bonding strength, but also does not increase excessive thermal resistance.
Thermal management: accurate temperature control from module level to electric the rate of pillow inner. After de-modularization, cell are arranged more closely, and the difficulty of thermal management increases exponentially. Gathering energy and new energyThe solution is "bionic flow channel"-liquid cold plate flow channel directly fits each large surface of cell, and the cooling liquid winds in the cell gap to achieve the effect of "one temperature control circuit for each cell. The maximum temperature difference of the whole package is controlled within 3℃, which is 50% improved compared with the traditional module scheme.
BMS sampling: a precision transition from hundreds to thousands of points. The battery pack of CTP 3.0 contains thousands of cell, and the voltage sampling points of BMS have soared from hundreds of module solutions to thousands. Energy gathering new energy adopts integrated sampling chip, single chip supports 24-channel synchronous sampling, sampling accuracy ± 1mV. The sampling harness replaces traditional wires with FPC (flexible circuit board), reducing the space usage by 70% and greatly improving the reliability.
IV. Security redundancy: De-module does not mean De-Security
structural simplification cannot be at the expense of security, which is the bottom line of gathering energy and new energy.
Thermal runaway suppression is the core proposition. After demodule, the distance between cell is reduced, and the risk of heat spread increases theoretically. The coping strategy of the new energy source is "precise heat insulation + directional pressure relief"-aerogel composite cell is laid between heat proof mat, and the thermal conductivity is as low as 0.02W/(m · K); the directional pressure relief channel is designed at the bottom of the box. When a single cell is out of control, the high temperature gas is discharged along the preset path without affecting the surrounding cell. Test verification showed that CTP 3.0 battery pack showed no signs of spread within 30 minutes after thermal runaway of a single cell. </span>
mechanical protection upgrade as well. The box adopts the mixed structure of high-strength aluminum profile and carbon fiber composite material, and the intrusion amount under side collision condition is reduced by 30% compared with the traditional scheme. Basalt fiber coating is added at the bottom Fender, and the stone impact resistance is increased by 2 times.
V. Future picture: the ultimate leap from CTP to CTC
CTP 3.0 is not the end point. The next generation technology of energy gathering new energy points to CTC(Cell to Chassis)-- Cell is directly integrated into the Chassis.
In the CTC architecture, the battery pack upper cover and the body floor are combined into one, the cell array is embedded between the chassis Stringer, and the box and chassis share the structural load. This means that battery pack is no longer a "part of the car", but a "part of the car". Vehicle Weight Loss 15%-20%, battery life increase 10%-15%, fabrication procedure reduction 30%.
"CTC is the ultimate form of structural efficiency, but it puts forward higher requirements for the integration capability of vehicle factories. "Looking forward to the vice president of energy new energy technology," We are jointly developing the CTC platform with strategic customers and expect to achieve mass production in 2028. "
from cell battery pack, the structural revolution of de-module is the epitome of the power battery industry from "extensive stacking" to "precision integration. CTP 3.0 for new energy sources proves that when the redundant structure is stripped, the space efficiency is released, and the system safety is reconstructed, the performance ceiling of battery pack will be significantly raised.
CUSTOMER SERVICE
Yue Gong Wang An Bei No. 4419002007491