A Study of the Physical Properties of Li-Ion Battery Electrolytes Containing Esters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adding esters as co-solvents to Li-ion battery electrolytes can improve low-temperature performance and rate capability of cells. This work uses viscosity and electrolytic conductivity measurements to evaluate electrolytes containing various ester co-solvents, and their suitability for use in high-rate applications is probed. Among the esters studied, methyl acetate (MA) outperforms other esters in its impact on the conductivity and viscosity of the electrolyte. Therefore, viscosity and conductivity were measured as a function of temperature and LiPF<sub>6</sub> concentration for electrolytes ethylene carbonate (EC): linear carbonate: MA in the ratio 30:(70-x):x, where linear carbonate = {ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC), dimethyl carbonate (DMC)}, and x = {0, 10, 20, 30}. Adding MA leads to an increase in conductivity and decrease in viscosity over all conditions. Calculations of electrolyte properties from a model based on a statistical-mechanical framework, the Advanced Electrolyte Model (AEM), are compared to all measurements and excellent agreement is found. All electrolytes studied roughly agree with a Stokes’ Law model of conductivity. In conclusion, a Walden analysis shows that the ionicity of the electrolyte is not significantly impacted by either MA content or LiPF<sub>6</sub> concentration. Li[Ni<sub>0.5</sub>Mn<sub>0.3</sub>Co<sub>0.2</sub>]O<sub>2</sub>/graphite cells containing MA were cycled at charging rates up to 2C and showed improved cycling performance.
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.
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 it