How Do Battery Design Requirements Differ Across EV Types? — A Complete Guide for OEMs and Procurement Teams

Introduction: EV Battery Design Is Shifting from “Universal” to “Application-Specific”

As the EV industry matures, we are witnessing a clear transition — from “one battery fits all” to “application-specific battery design.”
From logistics vans and passenger EVs to buses and heavy-duty equipment, each use case imposes distinct requirements for energy density, safety, cycle life, and cost structure.

For OEM procurement managers and solution providers, understanding these design differences is not just a technical matter — it directly shapes Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), ROI, and supply chain risk.

Chapter 1: EV Categories and Their Distinct Battery Requirements

Although “electric vehicle” is a single term, the categories under it vary dramatically in how their batteries are designed. The table below summarizes key requirement differences across EV types:

Vehicle Type	Typical Use Case	Design Priorities	Recommended Cell Chemistry	Procurement Focus
Passenger EV	Private car, taxi	High energy density, long range, lightweight	LFP	Safety, cost-to-density ratio, warranty cycle
Urban Delivery	City logistics	Fast charging, high cycle life	LFP	Charge efficiency, cycle count, BMS accuracy
E-Bus	Public transport, fixed routes	Safety, long life, modular serviceability	LFP / Pre-solid-state	Safety certification, maintenance cost
Heavy Duty / Utility	Port tractor, mining truck	High discharge rate, advanced cooling	LFP / High-rate NCM	Discharge C-rate, cooling design, service coverage
Light EV (2–3W)	Delivery, commuting	Low cost, light weight, reliability	LFP / LMO	Cost, reliability, swappability

In addition to vehicle types, the type of energy source is another key consideration.

Currently, the mainstream new energy vehicles on the market are electric vehicles, which can be further categorized into battery electric vehicles (BEVs), hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), and range-extended electric vehicles (REEVs). Depending on factors such as user experience, cost proportion, and technological maturity, different types of new energy vehicles require varying configurations of ev battery packs and individual cells in terms of type, material, and size.

Characteristics of Pure Electric Vehicle Batteries

• Energy and Capacity: Must be sufficiently large to ensure a long driving range, but the impact of ev battery pack volume and weight on overall vehicle performance must be considered.
• Charge-Discharge Performance: Continuous discharge should not exceed 1C, and peak discharge should not exceed 3C.
• Deep Discharge Capability: Must support deep discharge without affecting lifespan.
• Management System: Equipped with a Battery Management System (BMS) and thermal management system to ensure safe and stable battery operation.
• Spatial Arrangement: The layout and installation of the battery box and power battery must be specifically designed based on the vehicle's overall space and front/rear axle load distribution.

Characteristics of Hybrid Electric Vehicles Battery

• Peak Power: Must be relatively high, capable of short-term high-power charging and discharging.
• Cycle Life: Should exceed 5 years.
• SOC Range: Should ideally remain within 50%–85% to ensure battery performance.
• Management System: Equipped with a Battery Management System, including a thermal management system.
• Connection Method Differences: Series hybrid vehicles require high-rate discharge capability from the power battery, while parallel hybrid vehicles need the battery pack to provide instantaneous power to meet acceleration or hill-climbing demands.

Characteristics of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles Battery

• Dual-Mode Compatibility: Must meet the requirements of both pure electric and hybrid modes.
• Low-SOC Power: Must still deliver high power even at low SOC levels.

Characteristics of Fuel Cell Vehicles Battery

• Performance Requirements: Similar to hybrid electric vehicles, requiring high specific power and good charge-discharge performance to compensate for the lower power density of fuel cells.
• Management System: Equipped with a Battery Management System (BMS) and thermal management system to ensure safe and stable battery operation.

Differences in Range and Energy

For pure electric vehicles, since the power battery is the sole energy source, meeting long-range requirements typically demands an energy capacity of 50–100 kWh or more, utilizing high-capacity battery cells.

For range-extended electric vehicles, the internal combustion engine can recharge the ev battery, which acts as a "buffer," so the energy requirement is slightly lower than that of pure electric vehicles, usually around 30–50 kWh, with medium-capacity battery cells.

Plug-in hybrid vehicles go a step further than range-extended models—their engines can not only recharge the ev battery but also directly drive the vehicle, resulting in the lowest battery energy requirement, generally 8–20 kWh, and the smallest battery cell capacity.

Differences in Charge-discharge Characteristics

For pure electric vehicles (BEVs), the daily State of Charge (SOC) range is relatively wide (20%-80%), often undergoing deep charge and discharge cycles, requiring high deep-cycle life (over 1,000 full charge-discharge cycles). Additionally, to meet performance demands, the discharge rate must exceed 3C. Furthermore, to enhance user experience, charging time should be minimized as much as possible, necessitating higher fast-charging rates compared to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), with support for high-rate fast charging.

In contrast, for extended-range electric vehicles (EREVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), the ev battery typically operates within a moderate SOC range (e.g., 30-70%). Compared to the deep charge-discharge cycles of BEVs, shallow cycling theoretically helps extend battery life. However, in real-world usage, due to the lower energy capacity of EREVs and PHEVs, achieving the same electric driving range requires more frequent charge-discharge cycles, leading to faster battery degradation than BEVs. Therefore, higher cycle life (e.g., over 3,000 cycles) must be considered in design.

Moreover, since EREV battery packs are slightly smaller than those in BEVs, to meet demands such as rapid acceleration or high power output, EREVs require slightly higher discharge rates (e.g., 8C vs. BEVs' 3C). High-rate discharging exacerbates internal heat generation and material structural damage, accelerating degradation. Thus, battery cells capable of meeting high-rate discharge requirements must be used in the design.

Differences in Thermal Management

The degradation of batteries under high/low temperatures is an unavoidable topic for new energy vehicles. In low-temperature environments, compared to EREVs/PHEVs that can utilize internal combustion engines for preheating to warm up the battery pack, BEVs have a higher demand for battery heating in cold conditions. A well-designed rapid heating system is crucial for maintaining winter range. Additionally, BEV battery packs are larger and generate more heat, requiring stronger cooling capabilities to achieve temperature reduction in high-temperature environments.

Chapter 2: Procurement Logic Behind Battery Chemistry Selection

Chemistry	Energy Density (Wh/kg)	Cycle Life	Relative Cost Index	Safety Rating	Typical Use
NCM/NCA	180–260	1000–3000	1.3	★★☆	Luxury or high-performance EVs, "flying cars", and high-end mechanical products such as robots.
LFP	160–200	3000–6000+	1.0	★★★★	Passenger Cars, buses, logistics, ESS
LMO	120–160	500–1500	0.9	★★★	Light EVs, scooters

🔹 Procurement Takeaway:

• For cost- and safety-driven applications (e.g., buses, logistics), LFP offers the best total value.
• For energy-density-constrained use cases (e.g., luxury EVs), NCM/NCA remains superior but demands strong thermal and warranty management.
• Always specify minimum cycle life in the Technical Data Sheet (TDS) as part of your acceptance criteria.

Chapter 3: Procurement Priorities in BMS, Thermal Management, and Structural Design

The Battery Management System (BMS) and Thermal Management System (TMS) are the backbone of safe and efficient EV battery operation.
From a procurement perspective, these components largely determine system stability, maintenance cost, and after-sales reliability.

1. Battery Management System (BMS)

Key Features	Technical Highlights	Procurement Focus
Voltage/Current Monitoring	Accuracy ≤ ±1%	Accuracy test standards, sampling frequency
SoC / SoH Estimation	Algorithm Model	Support for OTA updates
Fault Protection	Overcharge/Overdischarge/Short Circuit Detection	Safety redundancy, UL or GB certification
Data Communication	CAN / RS485 / Ethernet	Compatibility with Vehicle Control Unit (VCU)
Power Management	Balancing Control, Load Optimization	Active/Passive balancing mode selection

🔹 Procurement Tips:

• For fleet or platform-based vehicles, prioritize software-configurable BMS to reduce requalification costs.
• Verify supplier ISO 26262 compliance and document retention policy.

2. Thermal Management System (TMS)

Solution Type	Advantages	Typical Applications	Cost Trend
Air Cooling	Low cost, simple structure	Low-power light vehicles	Stable Costs
Liquid cooling plate cooling	High efficiency, small temperature difference	Passenger cars, logistics vehicles	Decreasing Costs
Phase Change Material Cooling	No noise, fast response	High-end models / Special environments	High Costs
Direct Refrigerant Cooling	Optimal thermal response	High-end passenger cars / Fast-charging models	Slightly High but Rapidly Increasing Costs

3. Module and Structural Design

In the procurement process, the module structure not only impacts energy density but also directly determines maintenance convenience and manufacturing costs.

🔹 Procurement Checklist:

• Evaluate CTP/CTC integration risk (manufacturing vs. serviceability).
• Structural Materials: Aluminum alloy casing vs. composite shell.
• Verify mechanical protection standards (crush, vibration, IP rating).
• Service Accessibility: Whether single-module replacement is supported.
• Recyclable Design: Requirements for material separation and reuse rates.

Chapter 4: TCO and Lifecycle Cost Evaluation Methods

The ev battery’s upfront cost is only part of the equation — the TCO framework reveals the real financial performance over time. TCO typically consists of the following four components:

Cost Component	Typical Share	Description
Initial CAPEX	40–50%	Cells, BMS, structure, pack assembly
O&M	20–25%	Energy use, thermal & software maintenance
Replacement/Downtime	15–20%	Cell degradation & vehicle downtime
Residual/Recovery Value	-5% to -10%	Recyclable material return value

Conclusion

Between 2025 and 2030, EV battery procurement will evolve from product sourcing to ecosystem co-creation.
Balancing cost, performance, compliance, and sustainability will define the next wave of competitive advantage.

Looking to optimize your EV battery procurement strategy? Get in touch with our team today to discuss tailored solutions and request a personalized quote!