modeling mechanical failure in lithium-ion...
TRANSCRIPT
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
Modeling Mechanical Failure in Lithium-Ion Batteries
Shriram Santhanagopalan, Chao Zhang, Chuanbo Yang, Andy (Zenan) Wu, Lei Cao and Ahmad Pesaran
Transportation and Hydrogen Systems CenterNational Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden CO 80401http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/energystorage/
2
Temperature Stress Build-Up
Temperature
Ohmic heat generation Total heat generation rate
Velocity field
Commercially available tools implementing rigorous electrochemistry
Realistic geometries, CAD capabilities, validated models
Active participation from cell-manufacturers, OEMs
A. Pesaran, et al., DOE AMR 2013
S. Santhanagopalan, Batteries 2008, Niece, Oct. 2008
Computer Aided Engineering for Electric Drive Vehicle Batteries (CAEBAT)
3
Background• Numerical simulation of vehicle crash is a fairly well-established practice in the auto industry, with
significant cost reductions and faster delivery.• For PEVs, it is difficult to build predictive models: state-of-the art design tools do not consider the
battery as an energized entity.• The industry has a strong interest in having models for simulating crush of PEVs with batteries as
energized entities.• As part of CAEBAT, NREL has focused on developing tools to couple electrochemical and thermal
response of PEV batteries with mechanical deformation.
Structural additions for battery pack crash protection (Purple)
State-of-the Art Battery Crash Protection is currently limited to Mechanical AspectsM. Bartolo, Electric Vehicle Safety Technical Symposium, 2012.
4
From Crush to Potential Thermal Runaway
Heat GenerationHeat generation without rejection
Temperature increase
Spontaneous reactionsThermal Runaway
Reach reaction onset temperature
Battery CrushDamaged Zone created
Failure of Separator, current collector, etc.
Local shortCurrent Flow
Electrode contacts initiated
Smoke and Fire“may lead to” (depending on many factors) A. Pesaran et al., Battery Safety (2016)
5
Sample Output:• Current distribution among the different
cells within the module• Localized heat generation rates far away
from damage zone• Stress distribution across multiple parts of
the battery module
Validate against Module-Level Data
Displacement under Crush
Current density under short-circuit
Mechanical Modeling ApproachScale to Module-Level
Simulate Cell-Level Response for Multiple Cases
Explicit simulations parameterizematerial response
Sample Input:• Stress-strain curves for cell components
(separator, current collector, etc.)• Failure strengths for particles• Mechanical data for cell packaging• Temperature Vs C-rate for cell• Abuse reaction data from calorimetry
for specific chemistries
Start with Cell-Level Test Results as Input
Predicts cell temperatures to +10oC
1
2
3
4
6
5
6
Example 1: Mechanism of Cell Failure
Cathode-anode shortFailure of Copper Foil
Copper foil fails before separator ruptures
Shear failure of active material layers within a battery
Cell-level crush tests used to have a “pass” or “fail”
H. Wang, Battery Safety 2015
Copper foil Layer 1 Anode Layer 4 Cathode Layer 6
Side
faci
ng
inde
nter
7
Example 2: Estimating Short-Circuit Resistance
Anode-to-Cathode Short
Tmax= 224oC
Anode-to-Aluminum Short
Tmax= 1458oC
8
Component-level Mechanical Models feed into Cell-Level Safety Simulations
Evolution of Short Circuit Area
Time 0.0016 seconds
Time 0.0004 seconds
• Criteria for short-circuit not just based on mechanical failure.
• Changes in local resistivity and temperature effects determine outcome of mechanical crush events.
Time 0.0008 seconds
Dots: Experimental DataLine: Simulation
9
Example 3: Interpreting Test Results
Sahraei et al. Journal of Power Sources, 2014
C. Zhang et al. Journal of Power Sources, 2015
10
Example 4: 1S4P Cell-String – Lightweighting
Deformation of packaging material Deformation of the cells
Simulation results predict that:1. The packaging can prevent deformation of the cells by as much as 50% under these crush test
conditions.2. There is a significant scope to light-weight the pack, even after the safety threshold is met.
Simulation Results - Displacements
11
Example 5: Failure Propagation
Face impact – failure through electrode layer compression
Edge impact– failure through buckling of electrodes
von Mises Stress Contours for Side Vs Edge Impact on Module
Cell Level Tests performed at SNL
Failure Propagation Simulations in a Module
Module Crash test at SNL
12
Displacement (m)
Stress (kPa)
Cell Venting
Example 6: Multiple Failure Modes
Swelling of a Battery Cell
Santhanagopalan et al., 214th ECS Meeting SFO 2013Cellphone Drop Test Stress Evolution on Passive Components
13
Mechanical Deformation of Module Components
Multiple Failure Modes across Length Scales
Electrical Response of Individual Cells
Component level stress-strain response
• A comprehensive tool that covers multiple physics across length scales does not exist in the industry.
• CAEBAT models address this gap by working with different software companies, cell vendors and OEMs.
14
Summary
• Mechanical provide reliable insights into failure mechanisms and mitigation tools for lithium ion batteries.
• These tools are being successfully used by battery makers and OEMs to study application specific limitations in battery packs.
• These software also serve as repositories for material properties, as resources for exchange of relevant performance information across different scales among the key players at each level.
• Test methods to evaluate battery safety are constantly being improved based on feedback from end-users and lessons-learned on the field. Theoretical insights reduce the time for such build-and-break cycles.
15
Acknowledgements
Collaborations and Coordination
Funding
The NREL TeamMatt Keyser Mitch PowellKandler Smith Aron Saxon