Safety study of three types of lithium ion batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Safety is the first priority of any energy storage system. In this paper, safety studies are performed on three types of 2.6 Ah lithium ion batteries: high-drain thin-electrode battery (Cell 1), cellphone battery (Cell 2) and 18650 type battery (Cell 3), which are different in geometry and internal parameters. The batteries' discharge behaviors are tested on a battery analyzer, and their performances in nail penetration are simulated with an electrochemical-thermal coupling model. It is found that both the battery geometry and internal parameters have significant effects on the performance and safety of battery. Cell 1, with the lowest internal resistance among all, has the minimal temperature variations during discharges, but its simulated temperature rise in penetration is dramatic, especially at the nail point. As the internal resistance of battery increases, Cell 2 and Cell 3 experience severer temperature elevations and significant losses of available power and capacity at high-rate discharges, but meanwhile, they show better thermal behaviors in penetration simulation, with the maximum temperatures of both keeping below 200oC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".