Further demonstration of the VRLA-type UltraBattery under medium-HEV duty and development of the flooded-type UltraBattery for micro-HEV applications

Furukawa, J.; Takada, T.; Monma, D.; Lam, L.T.

doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2009.08.080

Cited by 68 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An UltraBattery commercialization and distribution agreement with Japan's Furukawa Battery Company and United States manufacturer, East Penn, was signed in 2007 by CSIRO. This UltraBattery has been used in HEVs (medium HEV and micro HEV) and the performances have been reported in a series of papers [30,31], showing the excellent performances of the design compared to standard VLRA batteries (Figure 8.6). …”

Section: Activated Carbon/pbo 2 Devicesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Asymmetric and Hybrid Devices in Aqueous Electrolytes

Brousse¹,

Bélanger²,

Guay³

2013

Supercapacitors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionCarbon-based symmetrical electrochemical double-layer capacitors (EDLCs) demonstrate higher energy density and power capability in organic-based electrolytes compared to aqueous-based electrolytes owing to their high operating voltage (2.5-2.7 V). Indeed, despite a lower capacitance of carbon-based electrodes in organic electrolytes (C), the maximum energy density (E max ) is expressed asand is proportional to the square of the maximum operating voltage (U max ), which is limited to the water electrochemical stability window that cannot theoretically exceed 1.23 V. Thus, even if the capacitance of a symmetrical carbon-based device in an aqueous electrolyte is twice that of an EDLC in an organic electrolyte (C aq = 2C org ), the maximum operating voltage of an organic-based device is more than twice that of an aqueous-based capacitor (U org = 2U aq ) resulting in:Obviously, this simple calculation does not take into account additional factors such as electrolyte concentration, ionic conductivity, packaging, and so on, but some more detailed theoretical calculation [1] points out the superiority of symmetrical carbon-based EDLC in an organic electrolyte (5.7 vs 1.7 Wh kg −1 for symmetrical carbon-based devices in aqueous electrolytes). Practically, the superiority of organicbased carbon/carbon devices has been demonstrated and most commercial-based devices use organic electrolytes. However, aqueous-based devices possess a number of advantages that can be emphasized in a commercial system, such as their high ionic conductivity, which can be useful to achieve high power density [2,3]. In addition, the electrothermal safety of aqueous-based devices will be greater in all cases than for organic-based electrolytes [4], which is one of the major points now addressed by electrochemical capacitor (EC) manufacturers as high currents and fast cycling rates are usually required, thus possibly leading to thermal rather than chemical runaway of the

show abstract

Section: Activated Carbon/pbo 2 Devicesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Asymmetric and Hybrid Devices in Aqueous Electrolytes

Brousse¹,

Bélanger²,

Guay³

2013

Supercapacitors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Above all, on the one hand, the addition of carbon can suppress the irreversible sulfation efficiently [124]. On the other hand, it may aggravate the hydrogen evolution, electrolyte dry-out, and failure of LAB.…”

Section: The Drawbacks Of Carbon In Negative Electrodesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review on the research of failure modes and mechanism for lead-acid batteries

Yang

Wang

et al. 2016

Int. J. Energy Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The lead–acid battery (LAB) has been one of the main secondary electrochemical power sources with wide application in various fields (transport vehicles, telecommunications, information technologies, etc.). It has won a dominating position in energy storage and load‐leveling applications. However, the failure of LAB becomes the key barrier for its further development and application. Therefore, understanding the failure modes and mechanism of LAB is of great significance. The failure modes of LAB mainly include two aspects: failure of the positive electrode and negative electrode. The degradations of active material and grid corrosion are the two major failure modes for positive electrode, while the irreversible sulfation is the most common failure mode for the negative electrode. Introduction of carbon materials to the negative electrodes of LAB could suppress sulfation problem and enhance the battery performance efficiently. This paper will attempt here to pull together observations made by previous research to obtain a more comprehensive and integrative view of LAB failure modes. Moreover, according to a detail investigation to the battery market, we have drawn an objective and optimistic conclusion of LAB prospect. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

“…The most widely acknowledged hybrid system is the Li-ion capacitor (LIC), normally produced by using Li 4 Ti 5 O 12 nanocrystals [37][38][39] or advanced graphite materials [40] as positive electrode, and AC as negative electrode. Another one is called "ultrabattery" based on the combination of lead-acid battery and EDLC [41][42][43][44]. Indeed combination of high energy density of batteries with long cycle life and short charging times of supercapacitors is considered the likely future direction [45].…”

Section: Overall Charge Storage Ability and Hybrid Supercapacitorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supercapacitors Performance Evaluation

Zhang

2015

Meet. Abstr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

N. Pan). AbstractThe performance of a supercapacitor can be characterized by a series of key parameters, including for instance the cell capacitance, operating voltage, equivalent series resistance, power density, energy density, and time constant. To accurately measure these parameters, a variety of methods have been proposed and used among academia and industry. As a result, some confusion has been caused due to the inconsistencies between different evaluation methods and practices. Such confusion hinders effective communication of new research findings, and creates a hurdle in transferring novel supercapacitor technologies from research lab to commercial applications.Based on public sources, this review article is an attempt to inventory, critique and hopefully streamline the commonly used instruments, key performance metrics, calculation methods, and major affecting factors for supercapacitor performance evaluation. Thereafter the primary sources of inconsistencies are identified and the possible solutions are suggested correspondingly, with emphasis on device performance vs. material property and the rate dependency of supercapacitors. We hope, by using reliable, intrinsic and comparable

show abstract

Further demonstration of the VRLA-type UltraBattery under medium-HEV duty and development of the flooded-type UltraBattery for micro-HEV applications

Cited by 68 publications

References 2 publications

Asymmetric and Hybrid Devices in Aqueous Electrolytes

Asymmetric and Hybrid Devices in Aqueous Electrolytes

Review on the research of failure modes and mechanism for lead-acid batteries

Supercapacitors Performance Evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About