4.6 Article

Investigation of Individual Cells Replacement Concept in Lithium-Ion Battery Packs with Analysis on Economic Feasibility and Pack Design Requirements

期刊

PROCESSES
卷 9, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pr9122263

关键词

lithium-ion battery; battery cell replacement; battery modeling; battery degradation; battery cost analysis; battery life optimization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper focuses on optimizing the usage of Li-ion battery packs by proposing the concept of cell replacement and conducting simulation studies. Results indicate that the cell replacement method can effectively prolong the lifespan of the battery packs and be more economically beneficial compared to the current approach.
The optimization of lithium-ion (Li-ion) battery pack usage has become essential due to the increasing demand for Li-ion batteries. Since degradation in Li-ion batteries is inevitable, there has been some effort recently on research to maximize the utilization of Li-ion battery cells in the pack. Some promising concepts include reconfigurable battery packs and cell replacement to limit the negative impact of early-degraded cells on the entire pack. This paper used a simulation framework, based on a cell voltage model and a degradation model, to study the feasibility and benefits of the cell replacement concept. The simulation conducted in MATLAB involves generating and varying Li-ion cells in the packs stochastically and simulating the life of the cells as well as the packs until they reach their end-of-life stage. It was found that the cell replacement method can increase the total number of cycles of the battery packs, effectively prolonging the lifespan of the packs. It is also determined that this approach can be more economically beneficial than the current approach of simple pack replacement. For the cell replacement concept to be practical, two main design criteria should be satisfied including individual cell monitoring and easy accessibility to cells at failure stage.

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

4.6
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