MICROSTRUCTURE AND CONDUCTIVITY OF THE SODIUM NICKEL CHLORIDE (ZEBRA) BATTERY CATHODE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The microstructure of the ZEBRA cells was examined at different cycle lifetimes. Various methods of sample preparation were used to remove the NaAlCl4 electrolyte and expose the cathode microstructure. Features such as layered NiCl2 crystals, large NaCl grains and needle-like FeCl2 phases were observed by SEM. The results indicate that nickel particles grow in size with age of the cell. Moreover, the presence of both Na6FeCl8 and NiAl2Cl8 phases was confirmed by XRD. Thermodynamic modeling was used to predict the phases expected when a cell has undergone overcharge or overdischarge during cycling. It is postulated that some phases observed in the cathode at room temperature may be artifacts due to transformations that occur during cooling and do not exist at the operating temperature. The presence of isolated nickel particles within the cathode was confirmed by SEM and FIB techniques. Furthermore, the conductivity of the NaAlCl4 electrolyte was measured at high temperatures and various additives were used to make the electrolyte a mixed ionic-electronic conductor. A special cell was designed to measure the conductivity of hygroscopic and volatile electrolyte at high temperatures. The best conductivity was obtained when using 0.2 mole fraction Bi as an additive to the NbCl5+NaAlCl4 mixture (Nb:Na=0.3, Bi:Nb=0.2). The conductivity values were doubled between 190 and 500˚C. The DC measurements confirm the presence of electronic conductivity in Bi+NbCl5+NaAlCl4 mixtures. In addition, the effect of NaF and Na2S on the conductivity of the NaAlCl4 electrolyte was measured.
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".