4.8 Article

Parameterization of prismatic lithium-iron-phosphate cells through a streamlined thermal/electrochemical model

期刊

JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES
卷 453, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.227787

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Army TARDEC Automotive Research Center
  2. US Department of Energy Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) [DE-AR0000269]
  3. UK ISCF Materials Research Hub for Energy Conversion, Capture, and Storage (M-RHEX), EPSRC [EP/R020973/1]
  4. UK Faraday Institution Multiscale Modelling Project under EPSRC grant [FIRG003, EP/S003053/1]
  5. EPSRC [EP/R020973/1, EP/R023581/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A model is proposed and used to parameterize the surface temperatures and electrical responses of A123 20 Ah LiFePO4 prismatic cells. The cell interior is described by a porous-electrode charge-transport model based on Newman-Tobias theory, which is coupled to a local heat balance. Dimensional analysis suggests that a multilayer electrode sandwich can be approximated as a single layer with appropriate rescalings of the model parameters, dramatically speeding computation. The simulation output depends on only a few observable dimensionless quantities, allowing parameter estimation through an iterative optimization scheme that directly compares computed results with measurements that track the cell voltage, while simultaneously recording infrared thermograms of the surface-temperature distribution. Despite the neglect of mass-transport limitations within Newman-Tobias theory, the model accurately predicts the dynamic terminal voltage, as well as the minimum, maximum, and surface-averaged temperature on the cell exterior. The electrochemical and thermal properties extracted from square-wave cycling data with various excitation amplitudes (2 C and 4 C) and short charge/discharge periods (50 s and 100 s) compare well with literature values, showing that it is possible to infer internal material properties by fitting external measurements.

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