Sebastian Puls, Elina Nazmutdinova, Fariza Kalyk, Henry M. Woolley, Jesper Frost Thomsen, Zhu Cheng, Adrien Fauchier-Magnan, Ajay Gautam, Michael Gockeln, So-Yeon Ham, Md Toukir Hasan, Min-Gi Jeong, Daiki Hiraoka, Jong Seok Kim, Tobias Kutsch, Barthélémy Lelotte, Philip Minnmann, Vanessa Miß, Kota Motohashi, Douglas Lars Nelson, Frans Ooms, Francesco Piccolo, Christian Plank, Maria Rosner, Stephanie E. Sandoval, Eva Schlautmann, Robin Schuster, Dominic Spencer-Jolly, Yipeng Sun, Bairav S. Vishnugopi, Ruizhuo Zhang, Huang Zheng, Philipp Adelhelm, Torsten Brezesinski, Peter G. Bruce, Michael Danzer, Mario El Kazzi, Hubert Gasteiger, Kelsey B. Hatzell, Akitoshi Hayashi, Felix Hippauf, Jürgen Janek, Yoon Seok Jung, Matthew T. McDowell, Ying Shirley Meng, Partha P. Mukherjee, Saneyuki Ohno, Bernhard Roling, Atsushi Sakuda, Julian Schwenzel, Xueliang Sun, Claire Villevieille, Marnix Wagemaker, Wolfgang G. Zeier, Nella M. Vargas-Barbosa
{"title":"Benchmarking the reproducibility of all-solid-state battery cell performance","authors":"Sebastian Puls, Elina Nazmutdinova, Fariza Kalyk, Henry M. Woolley, Jesper Frost Thomsen, Zhu Cheng, Adrien Fauchier-Magnan, Ajay Gautam, Michael Gockeln, So-Yeon Ham, Md Toukir Hasan, Min-Gi Jeong, Daiki Hiraoka, Jong Seok Kim, Tobias Kutsch, Barthélémy Lelotte, Philip Minnmann, Vanessa Miß, Kota Motohashi, Douglas Lars Nelson, Frans Ooms, Francesco Piccolo, Christian Plank, Maria Rosner, Stephanie E. Sandoval, Eva Schlautmann, Robin Schuster, Dominic Spencer-Jolly, Yipeng Sun, Bairav S. Vishnugopi, Ruizhuo Zhang, Huang Zheng, Philipp Adelhelm, Torsten Brezesinski, Peter G. Bruce, Michael Danzer, Mario El Kazzi, Hubert Gasteiger, Kelsey B. Hatzell, Akitoshi Hayashi, Felix Hippauf, Jürgen Janek, Yoon Seok Jung, Matthew T. McDowell, Ying Shirley Meng, Partha P. Mukherjee, Saneyuki Ohno, Bernhard Roling, Atsushi Sakuda, Julian Schwenzel, Xueliang Sun, Claire Villevieille, Marnix Wagemaker, Wolfgang G. Zeier, Nella M. Vargas-Barbosa","doi":"10.1038/s41560-024-01634-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The interlaboratory comparability and reproducibility of all-solid-state battery cell cycling performance are poorly understood due to the lack of standardized set-ups and assembly parameters. This study quantifies the extent of this variability by providing commercially sourced battery materials—LiNi0.6Mn0.2Co0.2O2 for the positive electrode, Li6PS5Cl as the solid electrolyte and indium for the negative electrode—to 21 research groups. Each group was asked to use their own cell assembly protocol but follow a specific electrochemical protocol. The results show large variability in assembly and electrochemical performance, including differences in processing pressures, pressing durations and In-to-Li ratios. Despite this, an initial open circuit voltage of 2.5 and 2.7 V vs Li+/Li is a good predictor of successful cycling for cells using these electroactive materials. We suggest a set of parameters for reporting all-solid-state battery cycling results and advocate for reporting data in triplicate. More transparent protocol reporting and comprehensive battery cell data are needed. Twenty-one research groups joined forces to assess solid-state battery performance and found considerable differences in assembly protocols that cause variable results.","PeriodicalId":19073,"journal":{"name":"Nature Energy","volume":"9 10","pages":"1310-1320"},"PeriodicalIF":49.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-024-01634-3.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Energy","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-024-01634-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The interlaboratory comparability and reproducibility of all-solid-state battery cell cycling performance are poorly understood due to the lack of standardized set-ups and assembly parameters. This study quantifies the extent of this variability by providing commercially sourced battery materials—LiNi0.6Mn0.2Co0.2O2 for the positive electrode, Li6PS5Cl as the solid electrolyte and indium for the negative electrode—to 21 research groups. Each group was asked to use their own cell assembly protocol but follow a specific electrochemical protocol. The results show large variability in assembly and electrochemical performance, including differences in processing pressures, pressing durations and In-to-Li ratios. Despite this, an initial open circuit voltage of 2.5 and 2.7 V vs Li+/Li is a good predictor of successful cycling for cells using these electroactive materials. We suggest a set of parameters for reporting all-solid-state battery cycling results and advocate for reporting data in triplicate. More transparent protocol reporting and comprehensive battery cell data are needed. Twenty-one research groups joined forces to assess solid-state battery performance and found considerable differences in assembly protocols that cause variable results.
Nature EnergyEnergy-Energy Engineering and Power Technology
CiteScore
75.10
自引率
1.10%
发文量
193
期刊介绍:
Nature Energy is a monthly, online-only journal committed to showcasing the most impactful research on energy, covering everything from its generation and distribution to the societal implications of energy technologies and policies.
With a focus on exploring all facets of the ongoing energy discourse, Nature Energy delves into topics such as energy generation, storage, distribution, management, and the societal impacts of energy technologies and policies. Emphasizing studies that push the boundaries of knowledge and contribute to the development of next-generation solutions, the journal serves as a platform for the exchange of ideas among stakeholders at the forefront of the energy sector.
Maintaining the hallmark standards of the Nature brand, Nature Energy boasts a dedicated team of professional editors, a rigorous peer-review process, meticulous copy-editing and production, rapid publication times, and editorial independence.
In addition to original research articles, Nature Energy also publishes a range of content types, including Comments, Perspectives, Reviews, News & Views, Features, and Correspondence, covering a diverse array of disciplines relevant to the field of energy.