MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental Performance Analysis of LG E-66 Cells from a Fast-Charging Porsche Taycan Battery Module

2024· article· en· W4400945739 on OpenAlexaff
Lucia Ifunanya Uwalaka, Qi Yao, Josimar Duque, Phillip J. Kollmeyer, Ali Emadi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Porsche Taycan, which is capable of up to 270 kW DC fast charging, can be charged from 5 to 80% state of charge (SOC) within 23 minutes. To better evaluate the battery storage system performance of the Taycan and explore ways to improve fast charging capability for electric vehicles (EVs), this work comprehensively tested a battery module as well as a battery cell taken from the Porsche Taycan EV. To monitor the thermal performance of the module during charging, three thermocouples are placed at the bottom of the module, and nine more on the cell surface within the actual module. Battery cell characterization tests were performed under -10, 0, 10, 25 and 40°C, and the module was evaluated based on the charging efficiency and the power loss at different charging rates. The results show that charging efficiency at 0.5C, 1C, and 1.5C is 97.9%, 97.1%, and 95.9%, respectively. Furthermore, a rescaled fast charge profile from the Porsche Taycan EV was applied to charge the module. The results show that, compared to a constant 1.5C charge, the fast-charge profile can charge the module to 80% SOC 1.4 times faster, with a cell surface temperature distribution of only ±1.9°C.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207