Tab-to-Busbar Interconnects Formed by Dual Flow Cold Spraying
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Battery manufacturing involves a large number of individual cells arranged in modules configured within a battery pack and connected either in series and/or parallel to deliver the required power and driving range. Cells within a module are linked using a tab-to-busbar connection as the electrical interconnect. Therefore, a battery pack contains a plurality of tab-to-busbar joints, and each must provide low electrical resistivity connection to minimize losses that may reduce the effective performance of the battery. In this work, the Dual Flow Cold Spray (DFCS) process, a modification of low-pressure cold spraying, was used to form low resistivity Cu+10%Zn and Al+10% Zn tab-to-busbar interconnects. As test coupons, 0.8 mm thick copper (Cu) was used to represent the busbar while 0.3 mm thick aluminum and nickel coated copper foils represented the respective electrode tabs. Low resistivity joint interconnects (≈100 μΩ) with high adhesion strength (≈120 MPa) have been formed. The influence of busbar surface preprocessing on the resistivity of the tab-to-busbar joints has been studied.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".