Predicting and Extending the Lifetime of Li-Ion Batteries

Li-ion cells are used in a variety of mobile and stationary applications. Their use must be safe under all conditions, even for aged cells in second-life applications. In the present study, different aging mechanisms are taken into account for accelerating rate calorimetry (ARC) tests. 18650-type cells are cycled at 0 • C (Li plating expected) and at 45 • C (SEI growth expected). After extensive evaluation of the electrochemical results (voltage curve analysis, capacity fade, energy fade, Coulombic efficiency), the cells are tested by PostMortem analysis (CT, GD-OES, SEM) to reveal the main aging mechanisms and by ARC to test the safety behavior. Besides typical ARC results such as onset-of-self-heating, onset-of-thermal runaway and maximum temperatures, as well as acoustic responses of thermal runaway are evaluated and a method is developed to compare fresh cells and cells aged until different SOHs. It turns out that the safety of aged cells is not simply a function of the SOH. However, safety is strongly affected by the main aging mechanism and to the history of operating parameters during the life-time of the cell. Driven by the demand for higher capacity, lower volume, and lower weight, Li-ion technology was developed in the 1980s.1,2 Nowadays, Li-ion technology is used for energy storage in a large variety of applications, e.g. smartphones, tablets, or drones. In particular, electric vehicles in combination with renewable energy sources are promising for reducing climate change and the corresponding glacier melting and sea level rise which is influenced by burning fossil fuels.3-6 For all applications, the safety behavior under all specified operating conditions is most important.7-9 The same is true for aged Li-ion cells used in second-life applications, for example cells which are utilized in stationary energy storage applications after their usage in electric cars.In the past, failure of Li-ion cells led to product recalls which are very expensive for the manufacturers and unsettle customers, even if such incidents happen only in very few cases (ppm range).10 At the moment, safety tests have to be performed with Li-ion prototypes cells before market release. In these tests, fresh cells are always used, however, aged cells are usually neglected. Even if fresh cells show an acceptable safety behavior, this can change for aged cells. 7,[11][12][13][14][15] While some authors observed decreases for certain safety properties, 7,11,12 others found improvements. 12,13,15 It is well known that aging mechanisms change the properties of the materials inside Li-ion cells. [16][17][18][19] Operating conditions and materials have a strong influence on these aging mechanisms. 12,[20][21][22][23] We recently reported on a change of the aging mechanism with temperature for cycling aging of commercial 18650-type cells with graphite anodes and NMC/LMO cathodes. 20 This mechanism change is expressed by a V-shape in Arrhenius plots of the capacity fade rates obtained from cycling at different ambient temperatures. 20 This c...

Section: Post-mortem Analysis Reveals Different Aging Mechanisms In 325supporting

confidence: 78%

“…Significantly lower CE values indicate side reactions connected to irreversible capacity loss as shown by high precision measurements by Dahn's group. 21,[43][44][45] For the measurements at 25…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrochemical, Post-Mortem, and ARC Analysis of Li-Ion Cell Safety in Second-Life Applications

Waldmann

Quinn

Richter

et al. 2017

“…22 Generally, lower fractional charge end-point capacity slippage, lower fractional fade and lower CIE lead to the cells with longer lifetime. 35 When cells were operated to 4.2 V, the concentration of FEC (from 2% to 5%) barely affected the cell performance while 4% VC led to higher capacity fade compared to other cells with smaller amounts of VC. The raw initial UHPC test data ( Figure S2), impedance test results and gas evolution during UHPC cycling ( Figure S3) can be found in the supplementary information.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

A Guide to Ethylene Carbonate-Free Electrolyte Making for Li-Ion Cells

Glazier

Petibon

et al. 2016

Self Cite

130

119

Li [Ni 0.42 Mn 0.42 Co 0.16 ]O 2 (NMC442)/graphite pouch cells demonstrate superb performance at high voltage when ethylene carbonate (EC)-free electrolytes, using a solvent mixture that is >95% ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) and between 2 and 5% of an "enabler", are used. The "enablers", required to passivate graphite during formation, can be vinylene carbonate (VC), methylene-ethylene carbonate (MEC), fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) or difluoro ethylene carbonate (DiFEC), among others. In order to optimize the amount of "enabler" added to EMC, gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS) was used to track the consumption of "enabler" during the formation step. Storage tests, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), ultrahigh precision coulometry (UHPC), long-term cycling, differential voltage analysis and isothermal microcalorimetry were used to determine the optimum amount of enabler to add to the cells. It was found that the graphite negative electrode cannot be fully passivated when the amount of "enabler" is too low resulting in gas production and capacity fade. Using excess "enabler" can cause large impedance and gas production in most cases. The choice of "enabler" also impacts cell performance. A solvent blend of 5% FEC with 95% EMC (by weight) provides the best combination of properties in NMC442/graphite cells operated to 4.4 V. It is our opinion that the experiments and their interpretation presented here represent a primer for the design of EC-free electrolytes. Lithium-ion batteries (LIB) are now widely used in electrified vehicles and energy storage systems.1 These applications require longer calendar and cycle lifetime as well as higher energy density. In order to increase the energy density of LIB, researchers focus on developing electrode materials with high specific capacity that may involve charging to increased upper cutoff potentials.2,3

“…[2][3][4][5] The rate of the parasitic reactions is related to both the catalytic role of the cathode surface which depends on its composition and surface area, 3,6 as well as on the stability of the electrolyte. [2][3][4][5] Methods such as the use of electrolyte additives [7][8][9][10][11] and core-shell positive electrode materials [12][13][14] have been developed and studied to reduce the rate and extent of parasitic reactions, and hence increase capacity retention and lifetime of high-voltage Li-ion cells. The layered lithium Ni-Mn-Co oxides Li 1+x (Ni y Mn z Co (1-y-z) ) 1-x O 2 (NMC) are considered to be promising positive electrode materials.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of the Failure Mechanisms of LiNi_0.8Mn_0.1Co_0.1O₂Cathode Material for Lithium Ion Batteries

Downie

et al. 2015

Self Cite

442

372

LiNi 0.8 Mn 0.1 Co 0.1 O 2 (NMC811) can deliver a high capacity of ∼200 mAh/g with an average discharge potential of ∼3.8 V (vs. Li + /Li), making it a promising positive electrode material for high energy density lithium ion batteries. However, electrochemical tests from half cells and full cells show poor cycling performance when charged to potentials above 4.2 V. The calendar and cycle lifetimes of cells are affected by the structural stability of the active electrode materials as well as the parasitic reactions that occur in lithium ion batteries. In order to explore the major failure mechanisms of the material, half cells (coin cells) with control electrolyte and full cells (pouch cells) with control electrolyte and with selected electrolyte additives were tested over four different potential ranges. Isothermal microcalorimetry was used to explore the parasitic reactions and their potential dependence. In-situ and ex-situ X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy were used to investigate the structural and morphological degradation of the materials over cycling. It was found that the dramatic c-axis change of the active material during charge and discharge may not be the major problem for cells that are cycled to higher potentials. The parasitic reactions that arise from the interactions between the electrolyte and the highly reactive delithiated cathode surface at high potentials are suggested as the main reason for the failure of cells cycled above 4.2 V. It should be possible to further improve the performance of NMC811 at high potentials by modifying the cathode surface and/or identifying and using electrolyte blends which reduce parasitic reactions. High energy density lithium ion batteries (LIBs) that are cheaper, safer, and with longer lifetimes need to be developed in order to meet the increasing demand for applications such as electric vehicles and large scale stationary energy storage. The energy density of LIBs can be increased by increasing the specific capacity and average potential of the cells. The calendar and cycle lifetimes of cells are affected by the structural stability of the active electrode materials as well as the parasitic reactions that occur in lithium ion batteries. The degree of lithium utilization of LiCoO 2 is limited to ∼70% in order avoid the O3 -H1-3 -O1 phase transformation when charged above 4.45 V.1 Parasitic reactions such as electrolyte oxidation at the cathode-electrolyte interface can ultimately cause cell failure.2-5 The rate of the parasitic reactions is related to both the catalytic role of the cathode surface which depends on its composition and surface area, 3,6 as well as on the stability of the electrolyte.2-5 Methods such as the use of electrolyte additives 7-11 and core-shell positive electrode materials [12][13][14] have been developed and studied to reduce the rate and extent of parasitic reactions, and hence increase capacity retention and lifetime of high-voltage Li-ion cells. The layered lithium Ni-Mn-Co oxides Li 1+x (Ni y Mn z Co (1-y-z) ) 1...