Comparative Evaluation of LMR-NCM and NCA Cathode Active Materials in Multilayer Lithium-Ion Pouch Cells: Part I. Production, Electrode Characterization, and Formation
Journal of the Electrochemical Society, ISSN: 1945-7111, Vol: 168, Issue: 3
2021
- 47Citations
- 82Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
A lithium- and manganese-rich layered transition metal oxide (LMR-NCM) cathode active material (CAM) is processed on a pilot production line and assembled with graphite anodes to ≈7 Ah multilayer pouch cells. Each production step is outlined in detail and compared to NCA/graphite reference cells. Using laboratory coin cell data for different CAM loadings and cathode porosities, a simple calculation tool to extrapolate and optimize the energy density of multilayer pouch cells is presented and validated. Scanning electron microscopy and mercury porosimetry measurements of the cathodes elucidate the effect of the CAM morphology on the calendering process and explain the difficulty of achieving commonly used cathode porosities with LMR-NCM cathodes. Since LMR-NCMs exhibit strong gassing during the first cycles, a modified formation procedure based on on-line electrochemical mass spectroscopy is developed that allows stable cycling of LMR-NCM in multilayer pouch cells. After formation and degassing, LMR-NCM/graphite pouch cells have a 30% higher CAM-specific capacity and a ≈5%-10% higher cell-level energy density at a rate of C/10 compared to NCA/graphite cells. Rate capability, long-term cycling, and thermal behavior of the pouch cells in comparison with laboratory coin cells are investigated in Part II of this work.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85103161150&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1149/1945-7111/abe50c; https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/1945-7111/abe50c; https://dx.doi.org/10.1149/1945-7111/abe50c; https://validate.perfdrive.com/9730847aceed30627ebd520e46ee70b2/?ssa=e9ccf4ab-f345-4743-8fcf-9d7a236ae2d1&ssb=89962228274&ssc=https%3A%2F%2Fiopscience.iop.org%2Farticle%2F10.1149%2F1945-7111%2Fabe50c&ssi=7e557f0a-cnvj-4947-9e59-4d284628bac3&ssk=botmanager_support@radware.com&ssm=42841235384850389849491615146734444&ssn=0cba2ebb458085358e43ca0663d7a96db134765553ad-d587-4971-80f86d&sso=2fcb1a66-0a667121c17af36160f100917250be664a8720ed6dbbfb20&ssp=19281322661734375165173509633524592&ssq=98107669268419090176170207384918455131839&ssr=NTIuMy4yMTcuMjU0&sst=com.plumanalytics&ssu=&ssv=&ssw=&ssx=eyJyZCI6ImlvcC5vcmciLCJfX3V6bWYiOiI3ZjYwMDBhYWEwODA3OS0yYjZmLTQzMWUtYWIwYi1iMzU3NDJlZTczNmYxNzM0MzcwMjA3OTY2NzIyNDc2ODkyLWRjMTZlMDllNzdkOTc4NzE4NDk0MyIsInV6bXgiOiI3ZjkwMDA1OWJhYzM2Zi1jMjQyLTQyZTAtYjhjYi01MzM4ZDRhYmI4YjIxMC0xNzM0MzcwMjA3OTY2NzIyNDc2ODkyLWQ3YzNhYjNkMmZjNTY5MTk4NDkzNyJ9
The Electrochemical Society
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know