MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412485118 · doi:10.2514/6.2025-3064

Evaluation of Thermal Runaway Venting Characteristics for High-Energy Density and High-Power Density 21700-Format Li-ion NMC Cells

2025· article· en· W4412485118 on OpenAlexaff
Xavier Arcand, William Mooney, Dany Francoeur, Hassan Azarkish, Mathieu Bouchard, David Rancourt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermal runawayEnergy densityThermalIonPower densityMaterials scienceNuclear engineeringPower (physics)Energy (signal processing)OptoelectronicsEngineering physicsThermodynamicsChemistryPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing use of lithium-ion batteries in aviation to support carbon-neutrality objectives raises critical safety challenges, particularly regarding thermal runaway and the venting of hot, flammable, and toxic gases. While previous studies have investigated cumulative gas release, there is a lack of transient experimental data on key venting parameters such as average ejection rate, duration, and gas temperature during thermal runaway. To address this gap, a custom low-cost test bench was developed to experimentally characterize gas venting behavior under critical thermal runaway conditions, where material ejection is maximized, using conduction heating. The tests were conducted in an inert nitrogen atmosphere to isolate gas venting from secondary reactions such as combustion, allowing a focused characterization of the venting phenomenon. The test bench consists of a sealed 45.8-liter pressure vessel instrumented with thermocouples and a high-speed pressure sensor enabling the evaluation of the total ejected gas, venting duration, and ejected gas temperature, with data sampled at 1 kHz. Tests were conducted on two commercial 21700-format NMC cells: a high-power cell (Molicel® P42a) and a high-energy cell (Samsung® 50e). Each cell type was tested three times, and the reported results reflect the average of those tests. Both cells triggered thermal runaway at temperatures between 210 and 220 ℃ and released comparable amounts of gas when normalized by capacity, 0.059 mol/Ah for the high-power cell and 0.072 mol/Ah for the high-energy cell. The high- power cell completed its venting in approximately 376 ms, while the high-energy cell did so in 291 ms. Ejected gas temperatures ranged from 640 to 960 °C. When adjusted to these ejection temperatures and standard atmospheric pressure, average ejection flow rates ranged between 50 and 100 L/s, with the high-power cell tending toward the lower end and the high-energy cell exhibiting higher flow rates. These findings provide essential data for designing safe venting and containment systems in aerospace environments.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvancements in Battery Materials→French-language works237,207→