MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2308365205 · doi:10.1149/ma2014-01/1/77

3D Simulation of Microstructure Effects in Alkaline Battery Cathodes

2014· article· en· W2308365205 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Doug R. Nevers, Logan Robertson, Dean R. Wheeler

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCathodeMicrostructureBattery (electricity)Materials scienceMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceAlkaline batterySimulationComposite materialElectrical engineeringPhysicsThermodynamicsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this work is to build an accurate 3D model to provide understanding of the effect of microstructure electrode performance, specifically on both electronic and ionic conductivity. The investigated system, the widely used primary alkaline battery, uses electrolytic manganese dioxide (EMD) active material in the cathode. An accurate and predictive 3D microstructure model of alkaline battery cathodes, which enables us to identify and quantify the processes that most affect performance, would be facilitate system optimization. The 3D model described here is part of ongoing work to investigate volumetrically efficient conductive carbon additives in primary alkaline battery cathodes [1,2]. The 3D simulation is based on the Monte Carlo method, in which a model generates a series of configurations that satisfy physical constraints in a statistically average way. The microstructure model is solved on a grid and is therefore called the stochastic grid (SG) model. The SG model is built by using the key statistics from microstructure analysis of FIB/SEM image of cathodes and includes short- and long-range order parameters. Toward this end, the work includes a full 3D reconstruction of a cathode using a sequence of 2D FIB/SEM images. This enables us to validate the SG model using measured microstructures. The SG model is additionally validated by electronic and ionic transport measurements. Figure 1 shows preliminary 3D simulation results of particle distributions within the cathode. The model can describe the connectivity and distribution of carbon and porous domains throughout the cathode, which corresponds to the electron and ion pathways of interest. The model results suggest that carbon additives function more to make short-range connections, rather than long-range highways for electrons. The effective electronic conductivity calculated from the SG model is highly dependent on EMD intrinsic conductivity and contact resistances between particles, which suggests some possible electrode performance improvements may be possible through modified EMD particle arrangement. The following will be presented and discussed: (1) a validated 3D model that effectively predicts microstructure and conductivity, which can be extended to multiple alkaline battery candidate systems; (2) Qualitative and quantitative model predictions of the performance effects of different carbon additives, pore volume fractions, and EMD distributions. [1] Y Wen, Dean Wheeler. 3D Model and Experiments for Understanding Carbon Additive Behavior in Primary Alkaline Cells, ECS meeting, Canada, 2012, abstract number: 420 [2] Doug R. Never, Dean Wheeler. Effect of Carbon Additives On the Microstructure and Conductivity of Primary Alkaline Battery Cathodes, ECS meeting, San Francisco, 2012, Abstract Number: 285 Figure 1: Preliminary 3D simulation results of particle distributions within a primary alkaline battery cathode. White represents large-size pores, gray represents EMD active material, and black represents graphite additive.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207