Impact of Electrolyte Additives on the Lifetime of High Voltage NMC Lithium-Ion Pouch Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work involves improving the lifetime of lithium-ion cells during high voltage cycling using electrolyte additives. Three generations of electrolyte additives were investigated and screened in NMC442/graphite pouch cells using a 24 h voltage-hold protocol at 40 °C to accelerate oxidative reactions occurring at 4.4 V. Once promising additives and combinations were identified, they were then tested in cobalt-free NMC640/graphite cells for long-term cycling to upper cutoff voltages of 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 V at temperatures of 20, 40, and 55 °C. Degradation mechanisms were probed using dV/dQ analysis, micro-X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. The primary failure mode of cells held at high voltages is due to increase in cell impedance, which is correlated to the dissolution of transition metals, specifically manganese, originating from the positive electrode. We believe this dissolution is presumably due to the formation of a high impedance rock salt surface layer on the NMC positive electrode particles. Such deleterious outcomes can be limited by selecting an appropriate electrolyte additive package. It is hoped that this paper can provide a starting point for developing NMC Li-ion cells that can operate to voltages as high as 4.4 V and still display long lifetimes.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".