4.8 Article

Thermal behavior and failure mechanism of lithium ion cells during overcharge under adiabatic conditions

期刊

APPLIED ENERGY
卷 182, 期 -, 页码 464-474

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.124

关键词

Lithium ion battery safety; Overcharge; Thermal runaway; Heat generation; Adiabatic condition

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51674228]
  2. National Key Research Program [2016YFB0100305]
  3. External Cooperation Program of BIC
  4. CAS [211134KYSB20150004]
  5. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [WK2320000034]
  6. Youth Innovation Promotion Association CAS [2013286]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cells in battery packs are easily overcharged when battery management system (BMS) is out of order, causing thermal runaway. However, the traditional calorimetry could not estimate dynamic overcharging heat release. In this study, commercial LiCoO2 + Li(Ni0.5Co0.2Mn0.3)O-2/C + SiO5 cells are employed to investigate the dynamic thermal behaviors during overcharge under adiabatic condition by combining a multichannel battery cycler with an accelerating rate calorimeter. The results indicate that overcharging with galvanostatic - potentiostatic - galvanostatic regime is more dangerous than that with galvanostatic way. Side reactions contribute 80% heat to thermal runaway in cases below 1.0 C charging rate. To prevent the thermal runaway, the effective methods should be taken within 2 min to cool down the batteries as soon as the cells pass inflection point voltage. Hereinto, the inflection and maximum voltages increase linearly with the increasing current rates. By scanning electron microscope and energy dispersive spectrometer, the decomposed products of cathode materials are suspected to be soluble with SiOx. The overcharge induced decomposition reaction of Li(Ni0.5Co0.2Mn0.3)O-2 is also proposed. These results can provide support for the safety designs of lithium ion batteries and BMS. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据