Low Temperature Electrolytes in High Specific Energy 18650 Li-Ion Cells for Future NASA Missions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NASA continues to have an interest in developing robust, high specific energy, rechargeable batteries that can operate well at low temperatures. Improvements in battery specific energy translates into reduced launch costs and/or enhanced mission capability. Improved low temperature performance results in reduced thermal management complexity and reduced allocation of energy to heaters. There is current interest in exploring some of the distant icy moons of Jupiter and Saturn, since these bodies are believed to have liquid oceans beneath the icy surface that may harbor life. In particular, NASA is considering surface missions to Europa, which would benefit from improved high specific energy, low temperature batteries. To address these mission needs, the Electrochemical Technologies Group (ETG) at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) is engaged in developing ultra-low temperature rechargeable batteries with high specific energy and enhanced low temperature capability for icy moon surface missions. 1 The performance goals of this program include operation over the temperature range of +40 o C to -60 o C (delivering up to 100 Wh/kg at -40 o C and 75 Wh/kg at -60 o C). In addition, continuous operation at low temperatures is desired, so the cells should possess good charge characteristics without undesirable lithium plating. E-One Moli Energy Ltd.’s commercially available 18650-size lithium-ion cells have been identified to be especially attractive, due to their high specific energy (>200 Wh/kg at ambient temperatures) and reasonably wide temperature range of operation. 1 Given the desire for enhanced performance at low temperatures, E-One Moli has fabricated advanced prototype cells containing JPL-developed low temperature electrolytes. These electrolytes have been developed under previous programs and included all-carbonate-based low EC-content electrolytes formulations, as well as methyl propionate (MP)-based electrolytes with various additives. 2-5 To assess the performance of these cells, we have performed discharge rate characterization over a wide temperature range (down to -70 o C). In addition, we have evaluated the cells during long term cycling continuously at very low temperatures, especially at -40 o C. These results have been compared to baseline commercial off the shelf (COTS) cells.In an attempt to characterize the likelihood of lithium plating when charging at low temperatures, the charge current and charge voltage has been systematically studied. Impedance measurements have also been performed as a function of temperature in an attempt to more fully understand the impact of electrolyte type upon the low temperature performance. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The work described here was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and supported by the NASA Game Changing Development Program. REFERENCES 1. F. C. Krause, A. Lawrence, M. C. Smart, S. F. Dawson, A. Ulloa-Severino, and B. V. Ratnakumar, “Evaluation of Commercial High Energy Lithium-Ion Cells for Aerospace Applications”, 227 th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society, Chicago, Illinois, May 25-29, 2015 (Abstract #47580). 2. M. C. Smart, B. V. Ratnakumar, K. B. Chin, and L. D. Whitcanack, J. Electrochem. Soc. , 157(12) , A1361-A1374 (2010). 3. M. C. Smart, B. V. Ratnakumar, F. C. Krause, L. D. Whitcanack, E. A. Dewell, S. F. Dawson, R. B. Shaw, S. Santee, F. J. Puglia, A. Buonanno, C. Deroy, and R. Gitzendanner, NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop, Huntsville, Alabama, November 17-19, 2015. 4. M. C. Smart, B. V. Ratnakumar, M. R. Tomcsi, M. Nagata, V. Visco, and H. Tsukamoto, 2010 Power Sources Conference, Las Vegas, NV, June 16, 2010, Pages 191-194. 5. (a) M. C. Smart, B.V. Ratnakumar, A. S. Gozdz, and S. Mani, 214 th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society, Honolulu, HI, Oct. 12-17, 2008. (b) M. C. Smart, A. S. Gozdz, L. D. Whitcanack, and B. V. Ratnakumar, 220 th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society, Boston, MA, October 11, 2011.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".