4.6 Article

Study of the Role of LiNi1/3Mn1/3Co1/3O2/Graphite Li-Ion Pouch Cells Confinement, Electrolyte Composition and Separator Coating on Thermal Runaway and Off-Gas Toxicity

期刊

出版社

ELECTROCHEMICAL SOC INC
DOI: 10.1149/1945-7111/ab829e

关键词

-

资金

  1. Association Nationale de la Recherche et de la Technologie (ANRT, France)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A reliable heating device coupled with a FTIR gas analyzer has been tailored with the aim of evaluating the role of state-of-the-art lithium-ion battery components and environmental conditions on thermal and toxic hazards. Here, we demonstrate its effectiveness in accurately assessing the role of fully charged 0.6 Ah pouch cells confinement, electrolyte composition and separator coating on heat release and toxic gas generation-related risks. The fire safety international standards developed by the ISO TC92 SC3 subcommittee were used to determine the asphyxiant and irritant gases toxicity. Cells tighting confinement proves to be a very efficient way to diminish and delay (from 180 to 245 degrees C) the thermal runaway phenomenon occurrence and relating toxic gas release. Vinylene carbonate as electrolyte additive is able to shift (+20 degrees C) the onset temperature, while substitution of 1/3 M LiPF6 by LiFSI does not modify the thermal behavior, nor the toxic risks. The coating of a tri-layer separator influences the irritant gas toxicity related risk, by decreasing fluorinated components release. This study highlights that some improvements regarding LIB safety can be achieved through appropriate component selection and cells integration design at a module/pack level. (c) 2020 The Author(s). Published on behalf of The Electrochemical Society by IOP Publishing Limited. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (CC BY, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse of the work in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

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